NP 7149 D PDF

EPI21 EPRI NP-7149-D
Project SQ01-1
Final Report
March 1991
SQUG
Summary of the Seismic
Adequacy of Twenty Classes of
Equipment Required for the Safe
Shutdown of Nuclear Plants
Prepared by
EQE ENGINEERING, San Francisco, California
Prepared for
Electric Power Research Institute
On behalf of
Seismic Qualification Utility Group
10446175
Summary of the Seismic Adequacy
of Twenty Classes of Equipment
Required for the Safe Shutdown of
Nuclear Plants
NP-7149-D
Research Project SQ01-1
Final Report, March 1991
Prepared by
EQE ENGINEERING
595 Market Street, Eighteenth Floor
San Francisco, California 94105
DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND

LIMITATION OF LIABILITIES
THIS REPORT WAS PREPARED BY THE ORGANIZATION(S) NAMED BELOW AS AN
ACCOUNT OF WORK SPONSORED OR COSPONSORED BY THE ELECTRIC POWER
RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INC. (EPRI). NEITHER EPRI, ANY MEMBER OF EPRI, ANY
COSPONSOR, THE ORGANIZATION(S) NAMED BELOW, NOR ANY PERSON ACTING
ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THEM:
(A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED, (I) WITH RESPECT m THE USE OF ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS,
METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS REPORT, INCLUDING
MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR (II) THAT SUCH
USE DOES NOT INFRINGE ON OR INTERFERE WITH PRIVATELY OWNED RIGHTS,
INCLUDING ANY PARTY'S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, OR (Ill) THAT THIS REPORT
IS SUITABLEm ANY PARTICULAR USER'S CIRCUMSTANCE; OR
(B) ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY · DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY Prepared for
WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING ANY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF EPRI OR ANY
EPRI REPRESENTATIVE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES)
Seismic Qualification Utility Group
RESULTING FROM YOUR SELECTION OR USE OF THIS REPORT OR ANY INFORMATION,
APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS REPORT. Electric Power Research Institute
3412 Hillview Avenue
ORGANIZATION(S) THAT PREPARED THIS REPORT:
Palo Alto, California 94304
EQE ENGINEERING
EPRI Project Manager
R. E. Schaffstall
Printed on Recycled Paper Nuclear Power Division

10446175
Electric Power Research Institute and EPRI are registered service marks of Electric Power Research Institute, Inc.
Copyright © 1991 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
ORDERING INFORMATION
Requests for copies of this report should be directed to Research Reports Center
(RRC), Box 50490, Palo Alto, CA 94303, (415) 965-4081. There is no charge for reports
requested by EPRI member utilities and affiliates, U.S. utility associations, U.S. government
agencies (federal, state, and local), media, and foreign organizations with which EPRI has
an information exchange agreement. On request, RRC will send a catalog of EPRI reports.
10446175
CONTENTS
Section
INTRODUCTION xxix
I Development of the Seismic Experience Data Base XXX
Unresolved Safety Issue A-46 and the
Seismic Qualification Utility Group XXX
The Seismic Experience Data Base xxxi i i
II Definition of General Equipment Classes xxxvi
III Generic Seismic Qualification Spectrum xxxvii
IV Summaries of Seismic Adequacy for
General Equipment Classes xxxviii
Definition of Equipment Class xxxviii
Data Base Representation xxxviii
Instances of Seismic Effects and Damage xxxix
Sources of Seismic Damage xxxix
Bibliography xxxix
1 MOTOR CONTROL CENTERS -
SUMMARY OF SEISMIC ADEQUACY 1-1
1.1 Definition of Equipment Class 1-1
1.2 Data Base Representation for
Motor Control Centers 1-5
1.3 Instances of Seismic Effects and Damage 1-8
1.4 Sources of Seismic Damage 1-10
1.5 Bibliography 1-10
2 LOW VOLTAGE SWITCHGEAR -
Low Voltage Switchgear 2-4
3 MEDIUM VOLTAGE SWITCHGEAR -

Medium Voltage Switchgear 3-5
iii
10446175
Section Page

4 TRANSFORMERS - SUMMARY OF SEISMIC ADEQUACY 4-1
4.2 Data Base Representation for Transformers 4-4
5 HORIZONTAL PUMPS - SUMMARY OF SEISMIC ADEQUACY 5-1
5.2 Data Base Representation for Horizontal
Pumps 5-3
6 VERTICAL PUMPS - SUMMARY OF SEISMIC ADEQUACY 6-1
6.2 Data Base Representation for Vertical
Pumps 6-3
7 FLUID-OPERATED VALVES -
Fluid-Operated Valves 7-3
8 MOTOR-OPERATED VALVES -
Motor-Operated Valves 8-3
iv
10446175
Section Page
9 FANS - SUMMARY OF SEISMIC ADEQUACY 9-1

9.2 Data Base Representation for Fans 9-4
10 AIR HANDLERS - SUMMARY OF SEISMIC ADEQUACY 10-1
Air Handlers 10-3
11 CHILLERS - SUMMARY OF SEISMIC ADEQUACY 11-1
11.2 Data Base Representation for Chillers 11-2
12 AIR COMPRESSORS - SUMMARY OF SEISMIC ADEQUACY 12-1
Air Compressors 12-4
13 MOTOR-GENERATORS - SUMMARY OF SEISMIC ADEQUACY 13-1
Motor-Generators 13-2
14 DISTRIBUTION PANELS -
14.2 Data Base Representation for Distribution
Panels 14-3
v
10446175
Section Page
15 BATTERIES AND RACKS -

Batteries and Racks 15-4
16 BATTERY CHARGERS AND INVERTERS -
Battery Chargers and Inverters 16-4
17 ENGINE-GENERATORS -
Engine-Generators 17-4
17.3 Instances of Seismic Effects and
Damage 17-6
18 INSTRUMENTS ON RACKS -
Instruments on Racks 18-4
19 TEMPERATURE SENSORS -
19.2 Data Base Representation for Temperature
Sensors 19-3
vi
10446175
Section
20 CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION PANELS AND CABINETS -

20.2 Data Base Representation for Control and
Instrumentation Panels and Cabinets 20-5
20.5 Bibliogra~hy 20-13
21 REFERENCES 21-1
vii
10446175
10446175
ILLUSTRATIONS
Figure
1-1 Primary components of a typical motor controller 1-12
1-2 Free-standing motor control centers 1-13
1-3 Motor control centers in typical nuclear plant
applications 1-14
1-4 Automatic transfer switches are often mounted in the
cubicles of motor control centers 1-15
1-5 Motor control centers at the Sylmar Converter Station 1-16
1-6 Motor control centers at El Centro Steam Plant 1-17
1-7 The ITE/Gould motor control center at the Union Oil
Butane Plant 1-18
1-8 Motor control centers located at near-field sites
affected by the Coalinga earthquakes of 1983 1-19
1-9 Kettleman Compressor Station 1-20
1-10 Westinghouse motor control centers at the Glendale Power
Plant in the San Fernando Valley and at the Goleta
Substation in Santa Barbara 1-21
1-11 Westinghouse motor control centers at the IBM/Santa
Teresa Facility near Morgan Hill and at the Renca Power
Plant in Chile 1-22
1-12 General Electric motor control centers at the Humboldt
Bay Power Plant and at the Rapel Hydroelectric Plant in
Chile 1-23
1-13 Individually mounted motor control cubicles at the
Oxiquim Chemical Plant in Chile and at the Adak Naval
Station 1-24
1-14 The Solid Materials Handling Facility Substation of the
Fertimex Fertilizer Plant in Mexico 1-25
1-15 Solid Materials Handling Facility Substation of the
Fertimex Fertilizer Plant 1-26
ix
10446175
Figure
1-16 The Sanwa Bank Computer Facility experienced an estimated
PGA of 0.40g during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake 1-27
1-17 Selected inventory of motor control centers within the
seismic experience data base as a function of ground
motion 1-28
2-1 Details of a typical low voltage (480 volt) circuit
breaker 2-9
2-2 Primary components of a typical low voltage switchgear
assembly 2-10
2-3 Typical low voltage switchgear in nuclear plant
applications 2-11
2-4 Sylmar Converter Station 2-12

2-5 El Centro Steam Plant 2-13
2-6 El Centro Steam Plant in the Imperial Valley 2-14
2-8 Typical low voltage switchgear assemblies in facilities
affected by the 1985 Chile Earthquake 2-16
2-9 Low voltage switchgear at the Adak Naval Station and at
the Puente Hills Landfill Facility near Whittier 2-17
2-10 Low voltage switchgear at the Wells Fargo Bank Data
Processing Facility 2-18
2-11 Llolleo Pumping Plant 2-19
2-12 The main control panel at the Llolleo Pumping Plant in
Chile is located at the interface of two buildings 2-20
2-13 The Solid Materials Handling Facility Substation of the
Fertimex Fertilizer Plant in Mexico 2-21
2-14 The second floor of the Solid Materials Handling Facility
Switchgear Building of the Fertimex Fertilizer Plant 2-22
2-15 Selected inventory of low voltage switchgear within the
motion 2-23
3-1 The primary components of a typical (older vintage) air-
magnetic medium voltage circuit breaker 3-10
3-2 The primary components of a fused-load interrupter
switch 3-11
X
10446175
Figure
3-3 A typical medium voltage switchgear assembly,
and the primary components of an individual
metal-clad section 3-12
3-4 Medium voltage switchgear in nuclear plant
applications 3-13
3-5 The Sylmar Converter Station includes one General
Electric medium voltage switchgear assembly 3-14
3-6 El Centro Steam Plant includes seven assemblies of medium
voltage, metal-clad switchgear 3-15
3-7 The Main Oil Plant in Coalinga includes two medium
voltage switchgear assemblies 3-16
3-8 Medium voltage switchgear assemblies mounted in outdoor

enclosures at the Valley Steam Plant in the San Fernando
Valley and at the IBM/Santa Teresa Facility near Morgan
Hi 11 3-17
3-10 IBM/Santa Teresa Facility 3-19

3-11 Typical medium voltage switchgear assemblies at
facilities affected by the 1985 Chile Earthquake 3-20
3-12 Medium voltage switchgear assemblies at the Puente Hills
Landfill Facility 3-21
3-13 Medium voltage switchgear assemblies at the Adak Naval
Station 3-22
3-14 Selected inventory of medium voltage switchgear within
the seismic experience data base as a function of ground
motion 3-23
4-1 The internal core-coil assembly and the enclosing casing
for typical dry-type and liquid-filled unit substation
transformers 4-10
4-2 The internal core-coil assembly and the enclosing sheet
metal casing for a ventilated dry-type distribution
transformer 4-11
4-3 The components of a typical three-phase core-coil
assembly for a dry-type unit substation transformer 4-12
4-4 The range of sizes for typical air-cooled distribution
transformers 4-13
4-5 Unit substation transformers in nuclear plant
applications 4-14
xi
10446175
Figure
4-6 Dry-type transformers at t~e Sylmar Converter Station 4-15
4-7 Oil-cooled unit substation transformers at El Centro
Steam Plant 4-16
4-8 Examples of transformers in the area affected by the 1983

Coalinga Earthquake 4-17
4-9 Dry-type transformers at the Evergreen College in Morgan

Hill and at the Humboldt Bay Power Plant 4-18
4-10 Wall-mounted dry-type distribution transformers at the
Kettleman Compressor Station in Coalinga and at the
IBM/Santa Teresa Facility in Morgan Hill 4-19
4-11 Oil-cooled transformers at the Rapel Hydroelectric Plant
and at Las Condes Hospital 4-20
4-12 At Adak Naval Station, two unanchored dry-type
transformers slid about 1/2 inch 4-21
4-13 California Federal Bank Computer Facility 4-22
4-14 Selected inventory of transformers within the seismic
experience data base as a function of ground motion 4-23
5-1 Components of a single-stage centrifugal pump 5-10
5-2 Cross section of a six-stage turbine pump 5-11
5-3 A typical reciprocating-piston pump 5-12

5-4 Horizontal single-impeller centrifugal pump and turbine
pump in nuclear plant applications 5-13
5-5 Horizontal pumps at El Centro Steam Plant 5-14
5-6 Horizontal pumps at the Union Oil Butane Plant 5-15
5-7 Horizontal pumps in the near-field of the 1983 Coalinga
Earthquake 5-16
5-8 Horizontal, single-stage, centrifugal pumps at the Valley

Steam Plant and the Glendale Power Plant in the San
Fernando Valley 5-17
5-9 Horizontal pumps at sites affected by the 1985 Chile

Earthquake 5-18
5-10 Mirassou Winery 5-19
5-11 Damage to horizontal pumps suffered as a result of the
1985 Mexico Earthquake 5-20
xii
10446175
Figure
5-12 The Caxton Paper Mill during the 1987 New Zealand
Earthquake; estimated PGA = 0.40g 5-21
5-13 Sanwa Bank Computer Center 5-22
5-14 Selected inventory of horizontal pumps within the seismic
6-1 Components of vertical deep-well turbine pump 6-7
6-2 Components of a vertical can-type pump 6-8
6-3 Components of a vertical single-stage centrifugal pump
supported on the piping system it serves 6-9
6-4 Vertical pumps in nuclear plant applications 6-10
6-5 Vertical pumps at El Centro Steam Plant affected by
the 1979 Imperial Valley Earthquake 6-11
6-6 Vertical pumps at near-field sites affected by the 1983
Coalinga swarm of earthquakes 6-12
6-7 Examples of vertical pumps located along the California
Aqueduct near Coalinga 6-13
6-8 Union Oil Butane Plant 6-14
6-9 Single-stage centrifugal pumps are supported on rod-hung
piping at the IBM/Santa Teresa Facility 6-15
6-10 Vertical pumps at the Rapel Hydroelectric Plant and at
the Concon Water Treatment Plant 6-16
6-11 Three high pressure vertical pumps at the San Juan de
Llolleo Pumping Plant 6-17
6-12 At the Anda Pumping Stations, increased vibrations were
noted in two vertical pumps 6-18
6-13 At the Mesquite Lake Resource Recovery Plant, several
vertical pumps stopped during the 1987 Superstition Hills
Earthquake 6-19
6-14 Selected inventory of vertical pumps within the seismic
7-1 Typical diaphragm-operated pneumatic valves 7-8
7-2 Typical piston-operated valves 7-9
7-3 A typical spring-operated pressure relief valve 7-10
xiii
10446175
Figure
7-4 Typical diaphragm-operated and piston-operated valves in
nuclear plant applications 7-11
7-5 Diaphragm-operated valves at the Valley Steam Plant and

the Glendale Power Plant in the San Fernando Valley 7-12
7-6 Diaphragm-operated pneumatic valves at the Main Oil
Pumping Plant and at the Shell Water Treatment Plant 7-13
7-7 Piston-operated valves at the Burbank Power Plant at the
Glendale Power Plant 7-14
7-8 El Centro Steam Plant in the Imperial Valley includes
both diaphragm-operated and piston-operated valves 7-15
7-9 The Union Oil Butane Plant in Coalinga includes examples
of both diaphragm-operated and piston-operated valves 7-16
7-10 Piston-operated valves at the IBM/Santa Teresa Facility
near Morgan Hill and at the Llolleo Pumping Plant in
Chile 7-17
7-11 Pressure relief valves at the Burbank Power Plant in the
San Fernando Valley and at El Centro Steam Pl~nt in the
Imperia 1 Va 11 ey 7-18
7-12 Spring-operated pressure relief valves at the Ormond
Beach Power Plant near Point Mugu and at the Puente Hills
Landfill Facility 7-19
7-13 Hydraulic piston-operated valves at the Pleasant Valley

Pumping Plant in Coalinga and at the Whitewater
Hydroelectric Plant near Palm Springs 7-20
7-14 The data base includes two examples of seismic damage to
diaphragm-operated valves caused by interactions with
adjacent steel 7-21
7-15 Selected inventory of fluid-operated valves within the
motion 7-22
7-16 Histogram representing the experience data base for
fluid-operated valves, with recommended restrictions
superimposed 7-23
8-1 Components of a typical motor-operated valve 8-6
8-2 Components of a typical solenoid-operated valve 8-7

8-3 Motor-operated valves in nuclear plant applications 8-8
8-4 There are about 35 Limitorque motor-operated valves at

the Valley Steam Plant, located at all elevations 8-9
xiv
10446175
Figure
8-5 MOVs at the Valley Steam Plant, affected by the 1971 San
Fernando Earthquake 8-10
8-6 At El Centro Steam Plant, located in the Imperial Valley,
motor-operators are used to actuate the main steam
isolation valves in each of the plant's four units 8-11
8-7 There are several solenoid-operated valves at El Centro
Steam Plant, affected by the 1979 Imperial Valley
Earthquake 8-12
8-8 The Main Oil Pumping Plant in the near-field of the 1983
Coalinga Earthquake includes 55 Limitorque motor-operated
valves 8-13
8-9 Main Oil Pumping Plant 8-14
8-10 Each of the pumping stations along the San Luis Canal
includes four or five large vertical pumps with motor-
operated valves on the discharge lines 8-15
8-11 There are about 50 MOVs at Las Ventanas Power Plant in
Chile 8-16
8-12 Motor-operated valves at sites affected by the 1985 Chile
Earthquake 8-17
8-13 Remote valve operators at Las Ventanas Copper Refinery,
8-14 Motor-operated valves on a small bore piping at the City
of Commerce Refuse Facility near Whittier 8-19
8-15 Selected inventory of motor-operated valves within the
motion 8-20
8-16 Histogram representing the experience data base for
motor-operated-valves 8-21
9-J Typical propeller-type axial fan 9-12
9-2 Details of typical axial fans with direct motor drives
and belt drives 9-13
9-3 Motor mounting configurations on centrifugal fans 9-14
9-4 Typical fans used in nuclear plant applications 9-15
9-5 Typical nuclear plant direct drive centrifugal fans and
belt driven centrifugal fans 9-16
XV
10446175
Figure
9-6 Centrifugal blowers at the Union Oil Butane Plant in
Coalinga and at the Puente Hills Energy Recovery Facility
near Whittier 9-17
9-7 Typical propeller fans mounted atop cooling towers at the
Valley Steam Plant and the Burbank Power Plant 9-18
9-8 Examples of propeller fans at the Union Oil
Butane Plant 9-19
9-9 Tube- and vane-axial fans at the Glendale Power Plant in
the San Fernando Valley and at Adak Naval Station 9-20
9-10 Examples of belt-driven centrifugal fans in the second
floor HVAC room of the Vicuna Hospital and at the Bata
Shoe Factory 9-21
9-11 Examples of centrifugal fans at the Sylmar Converter
Station 9-22
9-12 Examples of centrifugal and propeller fans at El Centro
Steam Plant 9-23
9-13 Typical direct drive centrifugal fans at the Valley Steam
Plant in the San Fernando Valley and the Humboldt Bay
Power Plant 9-24
9-14 Typical belt-driven centrifugal fans at the Drop IV
Hydroelectric Plant in the Imperial Valley and at the
Shell Water Treatment Plant in Coalinga 9-25
9-15 The HVAC duct system of the City of Commerce Refuse-to-
Energy Plant 9-26
9-16 The City of Commerce Refuse-to-Energy Plant includes
several centrifugal forced-draft fans feeding its trash-
burning boilers 9-27
9-17 The forced-draft fans serving the boilers of the SICARTSA
Auxiliary Power Plant 9-28
9-18 The penthouse at the Ticor Data Processing Facility 9-29
9-19 The Mesquite Lake Resource Recovery Plant includes
several centrifugal forced-draft fans 9-30
9-20 Selected inventory of fans within the seismic experience
data base as a function of ground motion 9-31
10-1 Arrangement of basic components of an air handler 10-8
10-2 Example of a large air handler using modular
construction 10-9
xvi
10446175
Figure
10-3 Air handlers in nuclear plant applications 10-10
10-4 Internals of a large, walk-in air handler at the
IBM/Santa Teresa Facility 10-11
10-5 The Sylmar Converter Station has a total of 54 air
handling units 10-12
10-6 These evaporative coolers at El Centro Steam Plant are
·located on the turbine deck in Unit 1 10-13
10-7 The Pleasant Valley Pumping Plant includes three air
handlers, a11 manufactured by the Air Therm Company 10-14
10-8 The Southern California Edison headquarters experienced a
PGA in excess of 0.40g during the 1987 Whittier
Earthquake 10-15
10-9 Air handlers at sites affected by the 1984 Morgan Hill
Earthquake 10-16
10-10 Small ceiling-mounted air handling units at Adak
Naval Station 10-17
10-11 At the Ticor Data Processing Facility, an air handler
unit, damaged its isolation mounts 10-18
10-12 Pacific Bell Rosemead Station 10-19
10-13 Selected inventory of air handlers within the seismic
11-1 Primary components of a centrifugal compressor water
chi 11 er 11-7
11-2 Chiller in nuclear plant application 11-8
11-3 The Sylmar Converter Station contains two chillers
manufactured by the Chrysler Corporation 11-9
11-4 At the Union Oil Butane Plant, cryogenic chillers are
used to separate butane and propane from the natural gas
found in oil wells in the Coalinga area 11-10
11-5 Chillers at sites affected by the 1984 Morgan Hill
Earthquake 11-11
11-6 The Wells Fargo Bank Data Processing Facility
includes four Carrier chillers on the ground
floor of the building 11-12
11-7 The Southern California Edison headquarters buildings
include five chillers 11-13
xvii
10446175
Figure
11-8 At the Ticor Data Processing Facility, one of two
unanchored chillers slid about 4 inches, during the 1987
Whittier Earthquake 11-14
11-9 This chiller at the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory broke
its mounting bolts and shifted its mounting frame during
the 1980 Livermore Earthquake 11-15
11-10 Selected inventory of chillers within the seismic
12-1 A two-stage reciprocating piston compressor showing
typical components and attachments 12-8
12-2 Various types of small compressors mounted atop air
receiver tanks 12-9
12-3 A skid-mounted, enclosed, rotary screw compressor showing
typical components and attachments 12-10
12-4 Typical air compressors used in nuclear plant
applications 12-11
12-5 Equipment related to air compressors such as vacuum pumps
and high pressure blowers 12-12
12-6 Compressors mounted atop air receiver tanks at the
Pleasant Valley Pumping Plant in Coalinga and the
IBM/Santa Teresa Facility in Morgan Hill 12-13
12-7 Large reciprocating air compressors (with
approximately 100 hp motors) at the Burbank Power Plant
in the San Fernando Valley and Concon Petroleum
Refinery in Chile 12-14
12-8 Rotary screw air compressors at the Whakatane Board Mill
in New Zealand and at the Mesquite Lake Resource Recovery
Plant in Superstition Hills 12-15
12-9 Examples of small reciprocating-piston air
compressors located in the basement of the
Sylmar Converter Station 12-16
12-10 Examples of service air compressors located on the ground
floor of El Centro Steam Plant 12-17
12-11 The Union Oil Butane Plant and Kettleman Compressor
Station include large reciprocating compressors 12-18
12-12 Examples of small reciprocating-piston air compressors at
the Main Oil Pumping Plant 12-19
12-13 Selected inventory of air compressors within the seismic
xviii
10446175
Figure
13-1 Typical motor-generator set 13-6
13-2 Motor-generators in nuclear plant applications 13-7
13-3 There are three motor-generator sets serving the Sylmar
Converter Station and two serving the Glendale Power
Plant 13-8
13-4 There are three motor-generator sets at the Burbank Power
Plant in the San Fernando Valley 13-9
13-5 The ground floor of the SCE Dispatch Center includes two
50 hp Kato motor-generators 13-10
13-6 Motor-generator sets at El Centro Power Plant and at the
Drop IV Hydroelectric Plant 13-11
13-7 Motor-generator set at the Laguna Verde Power Plant
13-8 The SICARTSA Steel Mill, affected by the 1985 Mexico
Earthquake, includes several large motor-generators 13-13
13-9 The Caxton Paper Mill, affected by the 1987 New Zealand
Earthquake, includes two large motor-generators 13-14
13-10 Small motor-generator sets at the Burbank Power Plant in
the San Fernando Valley and at the University of
California, Santa Barbara 13-15
13-11 Selected inventory of motor-generators within the seismic
14-1 Basic components of a typical distribution panel 14-9
14-2 Typical internal components within a
distribution panel 14-10
14-3 Distribution panels in nuclear plant applications 14-11
14-4 Distribution panels at the Sylmar Converter Station,
affected by the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake 14-12
14-5 El Centro Steam Plant contains six distribution panels
manufactured by Westinghouse and Square D 14-13
14-6 The Pleasant Valley Pumping Plant includes five
distribution switchboards 14-14
14-7 Westinghouse distribution panels at the Main Oil Pumping
Plant are mounted in an outdoor enclosure with a motor
control center 14-15
xix
10446175
Figure
14-8 Distribution panels are often incorporated into
assemblies that include motor control centers,
transformers, and switchgear 14-16
14-9 Distribution panels at the Metcalf Substation and at
Evergreen College 14-17
14-10 Distribution panels at the Adak Naval Station 14-18
14-11 Distribution panels at the Devers Substation, affected by
the 1986 North Palm Springs Earthquake 14-19
14-12 At the Caxton Paper Mill, a wall-mounted distribution
panel (right unit only) sustained an internal short
circuit during the 1987 New Zealand Earthquake 14-20
14-13 At the Del Amo Substation, a circuit breaker on a
distribution panel actuated during the 1987 Whittier
Earthquake 14-21
14-14 At the California Federal Bank Computer Facility, a
distribution panel was damaged when its cables
disconnected during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake 14-22
14-15 Selected inventory of distribution panels within the
motion 14-23
15-1 Components of a typical lead-acid battery cell 15-11
15-2 Typical examples of flat plate and Manchex batteries 15-12
15-3 Stationary battery rack configurations 15-13
15-4 Typical battery racks used in nuclear plant
applications 15-14
15-5 The Sylmar Converter Station includes five steel battery
racks located in the basement 15-15
15-6 Battery racks at El Centro Steam Plant 15-16
15-7 Battery racks at the Pleasant Valley Pumping Plant 15-17
15-8 Devers Substation includes two battery racks 15-18
15-9 The Edgecumbe Substation, which experienced an estimated
PGA of 0.50g during the 1987 New Zealand Earthquake,
includes four wooden battery racks 15-19
15-10 Two-step steel battery racks at the Burbank Power Plant
and at the Glendale Power Plant 15-20
XX
10446175
Figure
15-11 Two-step steel battery racks in the near-field area of
the 1985 Chile Earthquake 15-21
15-12 Batteries on wooden racks at Power Plant Number 3 on Adak
Naval Station 15-22
15-13 Examples of well-constructed wooden battery racks 15-23
15-14 The heavy construction of recent vintage
battery racks 15-24
15-15 The Pacific Bell facilities, affected by the 1987
Whittier Earthquake, illustrate the size of batteries
typically found in the de power supplies for telephone
systems 15-25
15-16 Batteries on racks at the Soyapango Substation affected
by the 1986 San Salvador Earthquake 15-26
15-17 . The single instance of internal failure within batteries
occurred at the Kawerau Substation in the 1987 Bay of
Plenty Earthquake in New Zealand 15-27
15-18 Selected inventory of batteries and racks within the
motion 15-28
16-1 Typical wall-mounted solid-state battery charger 16-9
16-2 Typical inverter 16-10
16-3 Static inverters and battery chargers in nuclear plant
applications 16-11
16-4 Battery chargers at sites affected by the 1971 San
Fernando Earthquake 16-12
16-5 Battery chargers and inverters at near-field sites
affected by the Coalinga sequence of earthquakes
of 1983 16-13
16-6 The Devers Substation includes an Elgar Inverter that was
undamaged by the 1986 North Palm Springs Earthquake 16-14
16-7 Battery chargers and inverters at sites affected by the
1985 Chile Earthquake 16-15
1971 San Fernando Earthquake 16-16
1973 Point Mugu Earthquake and the 1975/1980 Humboldt
earthquakes 16-17
xxi
10446175
Figure
16-10 Battery chargers at sites affected by the 1984 Morgan
Hill Earthquake and the 1985 Chile Earthquake 16-18
16-11 Single enclosure UPS systems at Adak Naval Station 16-19
16-12 The Wells Fargo Bank Computer Facility experienced an
estimated average horizontal PGA in excess of 0.30g
during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake 16-20
16-13 Del Amo Substation 16-21
16-14 Examples of large capacity inverters, serving the UPS
systems of the data processing centers 16-22
16-15 Anchorage failed on one of the Emerson "Acu-Power"
inverters at the California Federal Savings Data
Processing Center 16-23
16-16 Selected inventory of static inverters and battery
chargers within the seismic experience data base as a
function of ground motion 16-24
17-1 Primary components of a piston engine-generator 17-11
17-2 Typical engine-generator systems peripherals 17-12
17-3 Engine-generators in nuclear plant applications 17-13
17-4 Examples of large piston engines at sites affected
by the series of earthquakes near Coalinga in 1983 17-14
17-5 United Technologies Chemical Plant 17-15
17-6 Emergency generators at the IBM/Santa Teresa Facility,
affected by the 1984 Morgan Hill Earthquake 17-16
17-7 The California Federal Data Processing Center includes an
on-site power plant with four 660 kilowatt diesel
generators 17-17
17-8 The Kettleman Compressor Station generates its own
power with three 500 kVA natural gas-fueled
engine-generators 17-18
17-9 Engine-generators at sites affected by the March
1985 earthquake in Chile 17-19
17-10 Engine-generators at sites affected by the March 1985
earthquake in Chile 17-20
17-11 Emergency diesel generator at Devers Substation 17-21
xxii
10446175
Figure Page
17-12 The Pacific Bell Telephone headquarters, located in
downtown Los Angeles, includes a 1000 kW diesel
generator 17-22
17-13 Power Plant Number 3 17-23
17-14 One of the 75 kW diesel generators mounted on the roof of
the Southern California Edison (SCE) headquarters
building shifted laterally 17-24
17-15 One of the 50 kW diesel generators mounted on the roof of
the SCE headquarters failed to start 17-25
17-16 Selected inventory of engine-generators within the
motion 17-26
18-1 The primary components of a pressure switch are shown in
the lower sketch 18-8
18-2 The primary components of a Rosemount pneumatic-to-
electronic signal transmitter are shown in the
sketches 18-9
18-3 Bourdon tube pressure gauge 18-10
18-4 Polar-type chart recorders 18-11
18-5 Examples of components mounted directly to the pressure
vessels they control 18-12
18-6 Instrument racks in nuclear plant applications 18-13
18-7 Instrument racks at El Centro Steam Plant in the Imperial
Valley 18-14
18-8 Individually mounted pressure transmitters at the
Main Oil Pumping Plant and the Shell Water Treatment
Plant 18-15
18-9 Instrument racks at the IBM/Santa Teresa Facility near
Morgan Hi 11 18-16
18-10 Instrument racks at the Valley Steam Plant and the
Burbank Power Plant 18-17
18-11 Instrument racks at the Ormond Beach Power Plant near
Point Mugu 18-18
18-12 Instrument racks at the Humboldt Bay Power Plant and El
Centro Steam Plant in the Imperial Valley
18-13 Instrument racks at Las Ventanas Power Plant and at Las
Ventanas Copper Refinery 18-20
xxiii
10446175
Figure
18-14 The Caxton Paper Mill includes several instrument racks
with components such as Rosemount transmitters and
mercoid switches 18-21
18-15 Pneumatic-to-electric transmitters at the Puente Hills
Landfill Facility and at the City of Commerce Refuse-to-
Energy Pl ant 18-22
18-16 Fisher and Rosemount transmitters at the Mesquite Lake
Resource Recovery Plant 18-23
18-17 New Zealand Distillery 18-24
18-18 Selected inventory of instruments on racks within the
motion 18-25
19-1 Typical temperature sensors that utilize either RTD or
thermocouple elements 19-6
19-2 Temperature sensors in nuclear plant applications 19-7
19-3 Temperature sensors at the Valley Steam Plant and at the
19-4 Temperature sensors at El Centro Steam Plant 19-9
19-5 There are eight temperature sensors associated with the
cryogenic chillers at the Union Oil Butane Plant in
Coalinga 19-10
19-6 Temperature sensors at the Burbank Power Plant, affected
by the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake 19-11
19-7 Temperature sensors at the Glendale Power Plant 19-12
19-8 Temperature sensors at Power Plant Number 3 at
Adak Naval Station, affected by the 1986 Adak,
Alaska Earthquake 19-13
19-9 Temperature sensors at the Puente Hills Landfill
Facility 19-14
19-10 Selected inventory of temperature sensors within the
motion 19-15
20-1 Vertical switchboards at the Devers Substation near Palm
Springs and at the Drop IV Hydroelectric Plant 20-15
20-2 Enclosed switchboards at the Sylmar Converter Station in
the San Fernando Valley and at the Main Oil Pumping Plant
in Coalinga 20-16
xxiv
10446175
Figure
20-3 Dual switchboards at El Centro Steam Plant in the
Imperial Valley and at the Goleta Substation in Santa
Barbara 20-17
20-4 Duplex switchboards at El Centro Steam Plant in
the Imperial Valley and at the Gates Substation
in Coalinga 20-18
20-5 Control desks at the Goleta Substation in Santa Barbara
and at the Sylmar Converter Station in the San Fernando
Valley 20-19
20-6 Benchboards at the Pasadena Power Plant in the San
Fernando Valley and at the Rapel Hydroelectric Plant in
Chile 20-20
20-7 Dual benchboards at the Fertimex Power Plant in Mexico
and at the Concon Water Treatment Plant in Chile 20-21
20-8 Duplex benchboards at the Burbank Power Plant in the
San Fernando Valley and at Las Ventanas Power Plant
in Chile 20-22
20-9 An example of welded anchorage is illustrated by the
Sylmar Converter Station main control panel 20-23
20-10 The anchorage of this duplex switchboard at the Valley
Steam Plant 20-24
20-11 The anchorage of this duplex benchboard at the Burbank
Power Plant 20-25
20-12 The anchorage of these enclosed switchboards at the
Matahina Hydroelectric Plant in New Zealand 20-26
20-13 Rotary switches, panel lights, and meters mounted in
control panels at the Valley Steam Plant 20-27
20-14 Indicators mounted to the main control panel at the
Devers Substation 20-28
20-15 Annunciators, both enclosure-mounted and
panel-mounted 20-29
20-16 Ammeters, voltmeters, wattmeters, and frequency meters
mounted in the control panel of the Pleasant Valley
Pumping Plant 20-30
20-17 Strip chart recorders mounted in control panels at the
20-18 Examples of various types of relays typically mounted in
control panels 20-32
XXV
10446175
Figure
20-19 Strip chart recorders, indicators, meters, and
controllers mounted in a control panel at the Fertimex
Fertilizer Plant 20-33
20-20 Programmable controllers are a recent innovation that has
totally changed the design of control panels 20-34
20-21 Solid-state circuit boards are a standard component of
most control panel devices since the 1970s 20-35
20-22 Typical control and instrumentation panel components 20-36
20-23 Control panel components are typically cantilevered from
the front face of the panel and attached by screws
through the sheet metal 20-37
20-24 In some cases, control panel components are bolted to an
internal steel frame as shown at El Centro Steam Plant in
the Imperial Valley 20-38
20-25 Strip chart recorders at the Union Oil Butane Plant in
Coalinga and SICARTSA Steel Mill in Mexico 20-39
20-26 Circuit cards at the SICARTSA Steel Mill 20-40
20-27 Typical control and instrumentation panels in nuclear
plant applications 20-41
20-28 The main control panel at the Sylmar Converter
Station 20-42
20-29 El Centro Steam Plant includes several control and
instrumentation panels throughout the plant and in the
two control rooms 20-43
20-30 The main control panel at the Union Oil Butane Plant
suffered stretched anchor bolts 20-44
20-31 The Main Oil Pumping Plant includes four wall-mounted
switchboards 20-45
20-32 The Pleasant Valley Pumping Station includes nine control
panels, one for each of its large vertical pumps 20-46
20-33 The Coalinga Water Treatment Plant includes an enclosed
switchboard as the main control panel 20-47
20-34 Control panels at the Bata Shoe Factory and the Oxiquim
Chemical Plant 20-48
20-35 Control panels at the Laguna Verde Power Plant and Las
Condes Hospital 20-49
xxvi
10446175
Figure
20-36 Control panels at Devers Substation, affected by the 1986
North Palm Springs Earthquake 20-50
20-37 One of several vertical switchboards in the 500 kV
control house of the Devers Substation 20-51
20-38 The main control panel at the Whitewater Hydroelectric
Plant includes two General Electric programmable
controllers 20-52
20-39 Control panels at power plants affected by the 1987 Cerro
Prieto Earthquake 20-53
20-40 Control panels at the Del Amo Substation and the Olinda
Substation affected by the 1987 Whittier Earthquake 20-54
20-41 At the Kawerau Substation, affected by the 1987 New
Zealand Earthquake, three cabinets in the new control
house failed their anchorage and overturned 20-55
20-42 At the Edgecumbe Substation, affected by the 1987 New
Zealand Earthquake, three rows of relay and instrument
cabinets overturned in the operating bay of the control
house 20-56
20-43 At the Whakatane Board Mills, affected by the 1987 New
Zealand Earthquake, unanchored cabinets overturned 20-57
20-44 Selected inventory of control and instrumentation panels
and cabinets within the seismic experience data base as a
function of ground motion 20-58
xxvi i
10446175
10446175
INTRODUCTION
The program developed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the
Seismic Qualification Utility Group (SQUG) to address Unresolved Safety Issue
(USI) A-46 is based primarily on the application of seismic experience data to
power plant equipment.
The collection of seismic experience data was initiated by the SQUG in 1982 and
focused on eight representative classes of power plant equipment (1 and Z). The
study was limited to these eight equipment classes during the proof-of-
feasibility stage.
The NRC and the independent third party Senior Seismic Review and Advisory Panel
(SSRAP) have thoroughly reviewed the experience data base for the eight original
equipment classes (~). Their general conclusion is that with certain
restrictions, nuclear plant equipment in the eight classes is generically
qualified up to designated seismic motion bounds. Restrictions on the
applicability of this generic qualification to specific items in nuclear plants
were determined by the limits of representation for each equipment class within
the experience data base.
In addition, the NRC has stated that, based on the generally good performance of
power plant equipment in past strong earthquakes, it is feasible to extend the
data base beyond the original eight classes of equipment (i). The NRC has
requested that the basis for seismic adequacy be documented for all equipment
classes included in the safe shutdown list of a nuclear plant. This report has
been prepared in response to that request.
This report provides the following information:
• Defines twenty generic classes of nuclear plant equipment that can

be addressed by seismic experience data.
xxix
10446175
• Describes a generic ground motion response spectrum for
applicability of the seismic experience data base. The spectrum is
an average of the spectra from high motion data base sites that
included good representation of equipment.
• Summarizes the basis for the seismic adequacy assessment for each
equipment class through its representation in the experience data
base.
• Defines sources of seismic damage for each class of equipment. By
defining the realistic sources of seismic damage, restrictions can
be developed to prevent damage to equipment at similar ground
motion levels.
I. DEVELOPMENT OF THE SEISMIC EXPERIENCE DATA BASE

Very few components of nuclear plant systems are unique to nuclear facilities.
Nuclear plant systems include electrical switchgear, control panels, motor-
operated valves, pumps, piping, ducts, conduit, cable trays, and many other items
that are common components of conventional power plants and industrial
facilities. The seismic experience data base was developed to address the
problem of equipment qualification in nuclear plants which were built before
specific seismic requirements existed. By reviewing the performance of
facilities that contain equipment similar to that found in nuclear plants,
conclusions can be drawn about the performance of nuclear plant equipment during
and after a design basis earthquake.
Unresolved Safety Issue A-46 and the Seismic Qualification Utility Group
In December of 1980, the NRC initiated USI A-46 to address the question of the
seismic adequacy of equipment in 49 operating nuclear plants (72 units) that were
not licensed to current criteria. To resolve USI A-46, the NRC expected to
develop criteria for the reverification of the seismic adequacy of the equipment
in the plants.
Much of the equipment in these operating plants was installed when design
requirements, seismic analyses, and documentation were less formal than the
current rigorous practice. It was realized that providing documentation for the
seismic qualification or requalification of safety-related equipment using
procedures applicable to plants currently under design would be costly and
impractical.
XXX
10446175
As an alternative, an innovative proposal was made in mid-1981 to use earthquake
experience data of equipment performance to resolve USI A-46. The idea was
presented to the Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) of
the NRC and the NRC staff. The NRC recognized the potential value of the
proposed research, urged the utilities to explore the idea further, and initiated
its own program (§).
As a result, the SQUG was formed in January of 1982. The initial purpose was to
develop a practical alternative to the rigorous seismic qualification of
equipment. This alternative would be based on a thorough review of the
performance in past earthquakes of equipment that is representative of typical
nuclear plant equipment.
A pilot program to demonstrate the feasibility of using earthquake experience in

lieu of formal seismic qualification of equipment was performed in 1982 (l).
This program demonstrated that selected types of equipment in data base
facilities are similar to equipment in operating nuclear plants. It further
demonstrated that explicit seismic qualification of those equipment types should
not be required in view of their performance in strong earthquakes. The last
conclusion is currently ~upported by the program data base for nuclear sites with
zero period ground accelerations of less than about 0.30g.
As a result of the SQUG pilot program the NRC issued NUREG-1018 in September
1983, which contains a general endorsement of the use of experience data in lieu
of formal qualification of equipment in operating plants (~). In this report the
NRC states:
"(Our) assessment leads to the conclusion that the use of experience

data for equipment qualification provides the only reasonable
alternative to current criteria."
Although the SQUG pilot program had demonstrated the feasibility of using
experience data, it did not definitively resolve the issue of how and to what
extent experience data could be applied. An agreement was reached between the
NRC and the SQUG that a panel of recognized seismic experts would be formed to
evaluate the extent to which experience data would be used. The Senior Seismic
Review and Advisory Panel (SSRAP), composed of five members, was appointed in the
Spring of 1983. The five members were mutually agreed upon by the NRC and the
SQUG.
xxxi
10446175
The NRC and the SQUG agreed that the SSRAP would have the following mission: (1)
review the SQUG program, (2) determine the limits to which experience data could
be applied to the seismic qualification of equipment, and (3) recommend
additional areas where the program should be expanded.
The members of the SSRAP reviewed several data base facilities and nuclear plants
to judge similarity between the equipment in nuclear power plants and in the
conventional plants from which past earthquake experience data were collected.
The NRC, SQUG, and SSRAP also had discussions with representatives from vendors
of some of the classes of equipment.
The SSRAP completed its review of the SQUG program in February of 1984 (~). The
primary conclusions were:
• Equipment in nuclear plants is generally similar and at least as

rugged as that installed in conventional plants.
• This equipment, when properly anchored and with certain
reservations, has an inherent seismic ruggedness and has a
demonstrated capability to withstand substantial seismic motion
without structural damage.
• Functionality after strong shaking has been demonstrated, but the
absence of relay chatter during strong shaking has not been
demonstrated.
• With several important restrictions and exclusions, it is the SSRAP
judgment that below certain seismic motion bounds it is unnecessary
to perform explicit seismic qualification in order to demonstrate
functionality following an earthquake of existing equipment in the
eight categories addressed for operating nuclear plants.
• The existing experience data base reasonably demonstrates the
seismic ruggedness of this equipment up to these seismic motion
bounds. ·
In February 1987, the NRC issued NUREG-1211, "Regulatory Analysis for Resolution
of Unresolved Safety Issue A-46, Seismic Qualification of Equipment in Operating
Plants" (I). In this report, the NRC recommends the use of experience data as
the "most reasonable and cost effective" means of resolving USI A-46. At the
same time, a generic letter (GL 87-02) addressing this issue was issued to all
U.S. utilities with affected nuclear plants. A generic implementation procedure
to resolve USI A-46 is currently being reviewed by the NRC.
xxxii
10446175
The Seismic Experience Data Base
Strong-motion earthquakes frequently occur in California and throughout the
world; power plants or industrial facilities are often in the affected areas. By
studying the performance of these earthquake-affected (or data base) facilities,
a large inventory of various types of equipment that have experienced substantial
seismic motion can be compiled. The ground acceleration experienced at most of
these data base sites, measured by nearby ground motion records, is comparable
to, or in excess of, the seismic design basis for practically all United States
nuclear plant sites.
The primary purposes of the seismic experience data base are:

• To determine the most common sources of seismic damage, or adverse
effects to facilities that contain equipment representative of
safety-related nuclear plant systems.
• To determine the thresholds of seismic motion corresponding to
various types of seismic damage.
• To determine the performance of equipment during earthquakes,
regardless of the levels of seismic motion.
• To determine minimum standards in equipment construction and
installation, based on past experience, to ensure the ability to
withstand anticipated seismic loads.
To summarize, the primary assumption of the SQUG program is that the actual
seismic hazard to nuclear plant installations is best demonstrated by the
performance of similar installations in past earthquakes.
Facilities Surveyed in Compiling the Data Base. The seismic experience data base
is founded on studies of over 100 facilities located in the strong-motion areas
of 19 earthquakes that occurred in the United States and other parts of the world
since 1971. The earthquakes and facilities included in the data base are
summarized in Table 1.
The data base for this study was compiled through surveys of the following types
of facilities:
• Fossil-fueled power plants

• Hydroelectric power plants
• Electric distribution stations
xxxiii
10446175
• Petrochemical facilities
• Water treatment and pumping stations
• Natural gas processing and pumping stations
• Manufacturing facilities
• Large industrial facilities
• Commercial facilities (focusing on their HVAC plants)
In general, data collection efforts focused on facilities located in the areas of

strongest ground motion for each earthquake investigated. Facilities were sought
that contained substantial inventories of mechanical or electrical equipment or
control and distribution systems. Because of the number of earthquake-affected
. ,
areas and types of facilities investigated, there is a wide di~ersity in the
types of installations included in the data base. For the types of equipment of
focus, this includes a wide diversity in age, size, configuration, application,
operating conditions, manufacturer, type of building, location within building,
local soil conditions, quality of maintenance, and quality of construction.
The data base at the time of this writing includes· 19 earthquakes, usually with
several different sites investigated in each earthquake-affected area. The
earthquakes investigated range in Richter magnitude from 5.2 to 8.1. Measured or
estimated ground accelerations for data base sites range from 0.10g to 0.85g.
The bracketed duration of strong motion (on the order of O.lOg or greater) ranges
from 5 seconds to about 50 seconds. Local soil conditions range from deep and
soft alluvia to hard rock. The sites range from the epicentral area to great
distances from the epicenter. The buildings housing the equipment of interest
have a wide range in size and type of construction. As a result, the data base
includes a wide diversity of seismic input to equipment in terms of seismic
motion amplitude, duration, and frequency content.
Table 1 lists the horizontal peak ground acceleration that was either measured,
or estimated (based on nearby records) for each data base site. This ground
acceleration represents the average of the recorded peak accelerations in two
orthogonal horizontal directions. With few exceptions, facilities were not
investigated unless they experienced ground motion of O.lSg or greater, or some
damage was reported to have occurred.
xxxiv
10446175
Type of Data Collected. Information on each data base facility, its performance
during the earthquake, and any damage or adverse effects caused by the earthquake
were collected through several sources, including the following:
• Interviews with the facility management and operating personnel

provide reliable and detailed information on the effects of the
earthquake at each facility. At most facilities, several
individuals were consulted to confirm or enhance details. In most
cases interviews were recorded on audio tape. Numerous visits were
made to important sites.
• The facility operating logs provide a written record of the
conditions of the operating systems before and after the
earthquake. Operating logs list problems in system operation
associated with the earthquake, and usually tabulate earthquake
damage to the facility. Operating logs are useful in determining
the amount of time the facility may have been out of operation
following the earthquake, and any problems encountered in
restarting the facility.
l ]
• The facility management often produces a report summarizing the
effects of the earthquake, following detailed inspections. These
reports normally describe causes of any system malfunctions or
damage, and typically include any long-term effects of the
earthquake.
• If the facility can be surveyed immediately following the
earthquake, as has been the case in 13 of the 19 earthquakes
included in the data base, earthquake damage can often be inspected
prior to repairs.
Much additional data was also collected. These include seismic and other design
criteria, data books, and design drawings of structures, mechanical, and
electrical systems.
Standard procedures used in surveying data base facilities focus on collecting

all the information that is available on damage or adverse effects of any kind
caused by the earthquake. Except for sites that experienced very high seismic
motion (in excess of 0.50g peak ground acceleration), seismic damage to well-
engineered facilities is normally limited to a few items.
XXXV
10446175
II. DEFINITION OF GENERAL EQUIPMENT CLASSES
The equipment classes included in the experience data base categorize nuclear
plant equipment according to the following parameters:
• Construction: the physical structure of the equipment, including

enclosure and basic components
• Operation: the means by which the primary components, in
particular moving parts, perform their function
• Capacity: the typical range of operating parameters, e.g.,
amperage levels for electrical equipment
• Application: the function that the type of equipment normally
serves in a power plant
In defining equipment classes the following general guidelines were followed:
• Each class encompasses the broadest range of equipment included in

the experience data base. For example, the horizontal pump class
includes pumps that are motor-driven, steam turbine-driven, or
piston engine-driven. The general construction of these types of
pumps is similar, and all are represented in the data base.
• An equipment class includes all components typically attached to
the same enclosure or skid. Equipment that is normally found as
attached components of larger items is not addressed separately.
For example, the class of control and instrumentation cabinets
includes switches, relays, gauges, dials, recorders, etc., or all
components that are typically found in control and instrumentation
cabinetry.
The scope of equipment types required for safe shutdown was determined from a
survey of nuclear plants owned by utilities that are members of the SQUG. Each
member plant contributed a list of the types of equipment required for safe
shutdown. These lists were combined to form a master list of equipment types.
The equipment types were combined into classes based on the parameters and
guidelines outlined above. Table 2 lists the 20 generic classes of equipment
included in systems vital to the safe shutdown of nuclear plants, for which there
is adequate representation in the data base. Table 3 lists general sub-
categories of the 20 generic classes. Each nuclear plant will have a plant-
specific list of safe shutdown equipment, which will include some or all of these
equipment classes.
xxxvi
10446175
III. GENERIC SEISMIC QUALIFICATION SPECTRUM
In order to use seismic experience data to verify the seismic adequacy of nuclear
plant equipment, it is necessary to show that the design basis earthquake motions
for the nuclear plant are enveloped by data base earthquake motions. Free-field
ground motion response spectra are used to define the earthquake levels both at
nuclear plants and at data base facilities. A generic spectrum has been
developed by the SSRAP (~} to represent the ground motion at typical data base
sites. The data base spectra, which form the basis for the generic spectrum,
were chosen based on the following criteria:
• Highest seismic motion

• Duration
• Frequency content
• Presence of representative equipment
• Performance of representative equipment
The generic seismic qualification spectrum is based on the free-field ground

spectra from four data base sites: Sylmar Converter Station (1971 San Fernando},
El Centro Steam Plant (1979 Imperial Valley}, Pleasant Valley Pumping Plant (1983
Coalinga}, and Llolleo Pumping Plant (1985 Chile}. Figure 1 shows the free-field
ground motion spectra for the four sites (plotted at 5% damping}. The
recommended generic spectrum is also plotted in Figure 1. The generic spectrum
represents an average of the smoothed curves.
A discount factor is applied to the averaged spectrum in order to account for the
amplification of ground motion from the free field to equipment mounted in
nuclear plants. Building amplification effects are incorporated into the generic
spectrum by dividing the spectrum by a factor of 1.5. This new spectrum, shown
in Figure 2, is valid for equipment located within 40 feet of grade (and probably
higher, pending additional studies}. For equipment located higher than 40 feet
above grade, the recommended response spectrum multiplied by 1.5 must envelop the
appropriate floor spectrum in order for the experience data base to be
applicable.
xxxvii
10446175
To summarize, the seismic experience data base methodology is applicable if (1)
the nuclear plant free-field design basis earthquake is enveloped by the generic
spectrum, and (2) the equipment is mounted within 40 feet of grade.
IV. SUMMARIES OF SEISMIC ADEQUACY FOR GENERAL EQUIPMENT CLASSES

This document presents summaries of the seismic adequacy of general classes of
equipment currently under study in the SQUG program. Twenty classes of
equipment, typical of nuclear plant safe shutdown equipment, are reviewed. The
summary for each equipment class includes the sections described below.
Definition of Equipment Class

This section defines the equipment class, and the extent to which there is
adequate representation for this class within the data base. It identifies the
subclasses of equipment included in each class. Characteristics of typical
equipment within the class, as well as the range of types, sizes, operating
parameters, anchorage details, and applications for equipment within the class
are presented. A brief description is provided of the typical nuclear plant
applications of the class of equipment.
Data Base Representation

Data base representation for each equipment class is summarized in a bar chart.
Only equipment items for which details were collected are included in the bar
chart. Sites with significant seismic damage to equipment items in the data base
(damage that affected the functionality of the equipment) are also indicated.
The bar chart, therefore, presents a very conservative estimate not only of the
total inventory of a particular equipment class, but also of the positive
performance of that equipment class.
High motion data base sites that include examples of the particular equipment
class are summarized in this section. In addition, specific bounds of data base
representation for each equipment class are outlined. Photographs of data base
equipment are also included for illustration.
xxxviii
10446175
Instances of Seismic Effects and Damage
All instances of seismically induced damage to the equipment class are noted from
all sites included in the data base. In addition, mention is made of known
instances of damage to equipment within the class from sites not specifically
surveyed in compiling the data base.
Sources of Seismic Damage
In compiling the seismic experience data base, certain vulnerabilities have

become apparent for each class of equipment. For example, non-seismically
designed isolation mounts for HVAC equipment have consistently been damaged in
earthquakes. This section defines generic tendencies for seismic damage that
have been demonstrated by the equipment's performance in earthquakes. By
defining the equipment's vulnerabilities, realistic restrictions for use of the
equipment in nuclear plants can be developed to preclude seismic damage.
Bibliography
References used to generate the equipment description, as well as manufacturer's

specifications and industry standards, are listed in this section.
xxxix
10446175
Table 1
SUMMARY OF SITES REVIEWED IN COMPILING THE SEISMIC EXPERIENCE DATA BASE
Estimated
Peak Ground
Earthquake Acceleration
(Magnitude) Facility Type of Facility (g)**
San Fernando, CA Sylmar Large electrical substation 0.50-0.75

Earthquake Converter
1971 Station
(M6.5)
Rinaldi Large electrical substation 0.50-0.75
Receiving
Station
Valley Steam Four-unit gas-fired power 0.40
Plant plant
Burbank Power Six-unit gas-fired power 0.30
Plant plant
Glendale Five-unit gas-fired power 0.30
Power Plant plant
Pasadena Five-unit gas-fired power 0.20
Power Plant plant
Point Mugu, CA Ormond Beach Large two-unit oil-fired 0.20
Earthquake Power Plant power plant
1973
(M5.7)
Ferndale, CA Humboldt Bay Two gas-fired units, 0.30*
Earthquake Power Plant one nuclear unit
1975
(M5.5)
Santa Barbara, Goleta Electrical substation 0.26*
CA Earthquake Substation
1978
(M5.7)
Imperial Valley, El Centro Four-unit gas-fired 0.42*
CA Earthquake Steam Plant power plant
1979
(M6.6) Drop IV Two-unit hydroelectric 0.30
Hydro. Plant plant
* Ground acceleration measured by an instrument at the site

** Average of two horizontal components
xl
10446175
Table 1 (Page 2 of 7)
Estimated
Peak Ground
Humboldt, CA Humboldt Bay Two gas-fired units 0.25

Earthquake Power Plant one nuclear unit
1980
(M7.0)
Coalinga, CA Main Oil Pumping station feeding oil 0.60
Earthquake Pumping Plant pipeline from Coalinga area
1983
(M6. 7) Union Oil Petrochemical facility to 0.60
Butane Plant extract butane and propane
from well waste gas
Shell Water Petrochemical facility to 0.60
Treatment demineralize water prior to
Plant steam injection into oil wells
Coalinga Water Potable water purification 0.60
Treatment Plant facility
Coalinga Electrical substation 0.60
Substation No.2
Shell Tank Oil storage tank farm 0.60
Farm No.29
Pleasant Pumping station to supply 0.56*
Valley Pumping water from the San Luis
Plant Canal to the Coalinga Canal
San Luis Canal Agricultural pumping stations 0.20-0.60
Pumping taking water from the San
Stations (29) Luis Canal
Gates Large electrical substation 0.25
Substation
Kettleman Natural gas pipeline 0.20
Compressor booster station
Station
Morgan Hill , CA United Tech. Large research facility for 0.50
Earthquake Chemical missile systems development
1984 Plant
(M6.2)
IBM/Santa Large computer facility for 0.37*
Teresa Facility software development
xl i
10446175
Estimated
Peak Ground
Morgan Hill , CA San Martin Winery 0.35

Earthquake Winery
1984 (Cont.)
Wi ltron Electronics manufacturing 0.35
Electronics facility
Plant
Metcalf Large electrical 0.40
Substation substation
Evergreen Large college complex with 0.20
Community self-contained HVAC power
College plant
Mirassou Winery 0.20
Winery
Chile Earthquake Bata Shoe Four-building factory and 0.64
1985 Factory tannery
(M7.8)
San Isidro Electrical substation 0.58*
Substation
Llolleo Water pumping station 0.55
Water Pumping
Plant
Terquim Oil/acetate/acid storage 0.55
Tank Farm tank farm
Vicuna Four-story hospital 0.55
Hospital
Rapel Five-unit hydroelectric plant 0.40*
Hydroelectric Plant
San Sebastian Electrical substation 0.35
Substation
Con con Petrochemical facility producing 0.30
Petroleum fuel oil, asphalt, gasoline,
Refinery and other petroleum products

xl i i
10446175
Estimated
Peak Ground
Chile Earthquake Oxiquim Chemical facility producing 0.30

1985 (Cant.) Chemical various chemicals, including
Plant feed stock for paint ingredients
Con con Water pumping station 0.30
Water Pumping
Station
Renca Two-unit coal-fired power plant 0.30
Power Plant
Laguna Verde Two-unit coal-fired peaking 0.25
Power Plant plant
Las Ventanas Copper refinery/foundry/power 0.25
Copper Refinery plant
Las Ventanas Two-unit gas-fired power plant 0.25*
Power Plant
San Cristobal Electrical substation 0.25
Substation
Las Condes Four-story hospital 0.20
Hospital
Mexico Infiernillo Six-unit hydroelectric plant 0.15
Earthquake Dam
1985
(M8.1) La Villita Four-unit hydroelectric plant 0.14
Power Plant
SICARTSA Large, modern steel mill 0.25-0.50
Steel Mill
Fertimex Fertilizer plant 0.25-0.50
Fertilizer Plant
Adak, Alaska Adak Naval Diesel-electric 0.25
Earthquake Base power plants, electrical
1986 substations, sewage lift
(M7.5) stations, water treatment
plant, steam plants

xl iii
10446175
Estimated
Peak Ground
North Palm Devers Large electrical 0.85*

Springs, CA Substation distribution substation
Earthquake
1986 Whitewater Small hydroelectric 0.50
(M6.0) Hydro. Plant power plant
Chalfant Valley, Control Gorge Two-unit hydroelectric 0.25
CA Earthquake Hydro Plant plant
1986
(M6.0) Hi-Head Hydro Small one-unit unmanned 0.25
Plant hydroelectric plant
San Salvador Soyapango Electrical substation 0.50
Earthquake Substation
1986
(M5.4) San Antonio Electrical substation 0.40
Substation
Cerro Prieto, Power Plant 1 Geothermal power plant 0.20-0.30
Mexico Earthquake
1987 Power Plant 3 Geothermal power plant 0.20-0.30
(M5.4)
Bay of Plenty, Edgecumbe 230/115 kV substation 0.50-1.0
New Zealand Substation
Earthquake
1987 New Zealand Liquor distillery 0.50-1.0
(M6.25) Di st i 11 ery
Caxton Paper Paper and pulp mill 0.40-0.55
Mi 11
Kawerau 230/115 kV substation 0.40-0.55
Substation
Whakatane Paper mill producing 0.30
Board Mi 11 cardboard
Matahina Dam Two-unit hydroelectric 0.26*
plant
Whittier, CA Olinda Substation Electrical substation 0.65*
Earthquake
1987 SCE Central Data Processing Center 0.56*
(M5.9) Dispatch
Headquarters
xliv
10446175
Estimated
Peak Ground
Whittier, CA SCE Large office complex 0.42*

Earthquake Headquarters
1987 (Cont.)
California Data processing facility 0.42
Federal Bank
Facility
Ticor Facility Data processing facility 0.42
Mesa Substation Electrical substation 0.40
Sanwa Bank Data processing facility 0.40
Facility
Alhambra Pacific Three-story concrete-frame 0.30
Bell Station building
Rosemead Pacific Two-story steel-frame 0.30
Bell Station building
Pacific Bell Three steel-frame high-rise 0.15
Central Station buildings
Wells Fargo Data processing facility 0.30
Bank Facility
Center Substation El ectri cal Substation 0.30
Del Amo El ectri cal Substation 0.20
Substation
Lighthype Electrical Substation 0.26*
Substation
Commerce Refuse- One-unit gas-fired power 0.30
to-Energy Plant plant
Puente Hills One-unit gas-fired power 0.20
Landfill Gas & plant
Energy Recovery
Plant

xlv
10446175
Estimated
Peak Ground
Superstition Mesquite Lake 16 MW gas-fired 0.30

Hills (El Resource Recovery power plant
Centro), CA Plant
1987
(M6.3) El Centro Four-unit gas-fired 0.25*
Steam Plant power plant
Gorman A. D. Edmonston Large pumping plant 0.08
(Bakersfield) Pumping Plant
1988
(M5.2)

xlvi
10446175
Table 2
CLASSES OF SAFE SHUTDOWN EQUIPMENT
I. Motor control centers

2. Low voltage switchgear
3. Medium voltage switchgear
4. Transformers
5. Horizontal pumps
6. Vertical pumps
7. Fluid-operated valves
8. Motor-operated valves
9. Fans
10. Air handlers
11. Chillers
12. Air compressors
13. Motor-generators
14. Distribution panels
15. Batteries and racks
16. Battery chargers and inverters
17. Engine-generators
18. Instruments on racks
19. Temperature sensors
20. Control and instrumentation panels and cabinets
xlvii
10446175
Table 3
GENERAL SUB-CATEGORIES OF CLASSES
OF SAFE SHUTDOWN EQUIPMENT
1. MOTOR CONTROL CENTERS

Motor control center
Wall- or rack-mounted motor controllers
2. LOW VOLTAGE SWITCHGEAR
Low voltage draw-out switchgear
Low voltage disconnect switches
Unit substations
3. MEDIUM VOLTAGE SWITCHGEAR
Medium voltage draw-out switchgear
Medium voltage disconnect switches
Unit substations
4. TRANSFORMERS
Liquid-filled medium/low voltage transformers
Dry-type medium/low voltage transformers
Distribution transformers
5. HORIZONTAL PUMPS
Motor-driven horizontal centrifugal pumps
Turbine-driven horizontal centrifugal pumps
Engine-driven horizontal centrifugal pumps
Motor-driven positive displacement pumps
6. VERTICAL PUMPS
Vertical single-stage centrifugal pumps
Vertical multi-stage deep-well pumps
7. FLUID-OPERATED VALVES
Diaphragm-operated pneumatic valves
Piston-operated pneumatic valves
Spring-operated pressure relief valves
8. MOTOR-OPERATED VALVES
Motor-operated valves
Solenoid-operated valves
xlviii
10446175
9. FANS
Axial fans
Centrifugal fans
Blowers
10. AIR HANDLERS
Water-cooled air handlers
Refrigerant-cooled air handlers
Air conditioners
11. CHILLERS
Water chillers
Refrigerant chillers
12. AIR COMPRESSORS
Reciprocating-piston compressors
Rotary screw compressors
13. MOTOR-GENERATORS
Motor-generators
14. DISTRIBUTION PANELS
Distribution panelboards
Distribution switchboards
15. BATTERIES AND RACKS
Lead calcium flat plate batteries
Lead cadmium flat plate batteries
Plante (Manchex) batteries
Battery racks
16. BATTERY CHARGERS AND INVERTERS
Solid state battery chargers
Solid state static inverters
17. ENGINE-GENERATORS
Piston engine generators
18. INSTRUMENTS ON RACKS
Wall-mounted transmitters/instruments
Rack-mounted transmitters/instruments
Supporting racks
xlix
10446175
19. TEMPERATURE SENSORS
Thermocouples
Resistance Temperature Detectors (RTDs)
20. CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION PANELS AND CABINETS
Wall- and rack-mounted control and instrumentation panels
Wall- and rack-mounted control and instrumentation cabinets
Dual switchboard control and instrumentation cabinets
Duplex switchboard and benchboard control and
instrumentation cabinets
1
10446175
2.00 LLOLLEO PUMPING PLANT, 1985 CHILE EQ.
NEAR FIELD SITES, 1983 COALINGA EQ.
1.80 SYLMAR CONVERTER STATION, 1971 SAN FERNANDO EQ.
EL CENTRO STEAM PLANT, 19791MPERIAL VALLEY EQ.
1.60 AVERAGE OF DATA BASE SPECTRA
RECOMMENDED GENERIC BOUNDING SPECTRUM
1.40
.......
C)
....,
c 1.20
0
:;::; ,·..
ra
....
Q)
a; 1.00 ".., '
·.
~~:<'~~~ ~ ·--------
~·~.- ~ ~~~-~----~ ~ ~- ~-~- ~ ~__~ _~ ~ ~-:--~
u
...... u
.q:
0.80
0.60
'·- -~-~-~-~----·-·-------·----
-........._
0.40
0.20
0.00
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0
SPEC·&
Frequency (Hz)
Figure 1. Free-field ground motion response spectra for selected data base sites and the
recommended generic qualification spectrum. Spectra are plotted at 5% damping
10446175
2.00
1.80
1.60
1.40
t""""\ 1.20 Recommended Generic Seiamic

C)
0-.J Qualification Spectrum (x 1.6)
c:
-
.Q
as
~
Q)
1.00
Recommended Generic Seiamic
Qualification Spectrum (x 1.0)
...... ~ 0.80
0
<(
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00 I
0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0
Frequency (Hz)
Figure 2. Recommended generic seismic qualification spectra, shown with and without building
amplification factor of 1.5. Spectra are plotted at 5% damping.
10446175
Section 1
MOTOR CONTROL CENTERS
SUMMARY OF SEISMIC ADEQUACY
The equipment class of motor control centers (MCCs) includes control and
electrical fault protection systems for motors powered at 600 volts or less
(typically 480 volts). Motor controllers are mounted in sheet metal cubicles.
They are typically assembled into stacks, which are lined up side-by-side and
bolted together to form a motor control center. Alternately, individual motor
controller cubicles may be attached to racks, walls, or even the equipment they
serve. The equipment class includes motor controllers mounted in individual
cubicles on racks or walls, as well as free-standing motor control centers.
1.1 DEFINITION OF EQUIPMENT CLASS

Motor control centers consist of one or more cubicle-enclosed motor controllers.
The equipment class is limited to controllers for low voltage motors (i.e.,
powered at 600 volts or less, and typically at currents of less than 2500
amperes). This includes the majority of motors in power plant applications
(e.g., serving HVAC equipment, pumps, motor-operated valves, compressors) that
operate at a nominal 480 volts and range from 1 to 1000 horsepower. Motors which
operate at higher levels of current or voltage are usually served by switchgear.
Motor Controllers
Individual motor controllers are normally mounted in a sheet metal box that can
be removed from its cubicle in the motor control center. The individual
components of the motor controller are attached to the walls and rear face of the
box with small screws. A motor controller typically includes the components
listed below.
The molded-case circuit breaker or disconnect switch provides a manual switch for
disconnecting the primary (480 volt) circuit. For motor protection, it normally
includes a magnetic contactor that breaks the primary circuit in an overcurrent
10446175
1-1
fault. The device is often adjustable, regarding the level and duration of
overcurrent permitted in the circuit before disconnect.
Magnetic contactors close the primary (480 volt) circuit to start the motor, and
open the circuit under certain electrical fault conditions. The magnetic
contactor is actuated by a pilot button, often mounted on the front face of the
controller cubicle. This pilot button operates a control circuit, usually at 120
volts, that activates a coil in the contactor and closes the primary circuit.
The magnetic contactor usually has an attached thermal overload relay that
disconnects the primary circuit under extended overcurrent conditions. Certain
motors require optional devices to be added to the contactor, such as pneumatic
timing relays, that delay opening or closing in the primary circuit during
starting and stopping.
A control transformer is a small transformer that is often included in a motor

controller to supply power from the primary circuit to a secondary control
circuit (typically at 120 volts).
Fuses are often included in the motor control center as additional protection
against electrical faults in the primary circuit.
Push buttons and pilot lights are typically mounted on the swinging door that
forms the front face of the motor controller cubicle. The control circuit
typically includes push buttons that activate the magnetic contactor to close the
primary circuit, and pilot lights that indicate when the circuit is closed.
The components of a typical motor controller are shown in Figure 1-1. In most
MCCs, the sheet metal box that contains the motor controller components is
removable for maintenance or repair. An example of a motor controller removed
from an MCC at a data base site is shown in Figure 1-7 (lower photograph). The
motor controller enclosure box is usually equipped with three clips (for three-
phase circuits) that clamp to vertical bus bars in the rear of the MCC and
provide electrical contact for the primary circuit. In addition, the box is
normally secured in place by one or more screws that attach it to the cabinet
frame.
Motor controllers are rated by standards of the National Electric Manufacturers

Association (NEMA), according to the size of the motors they serve. Standard
1-2
10446175
sizes range from the NEMA Size 00 controller for motors of 2 horsepower or less,
to the Size 9 controller for motors of about 1000 horsepower.
Additional Components
In addition to motor controllers, other components are often mounted in motor
control center cabinets. A metering compartment is sometimes provided,
containing electromechanical relays, and instrumentation such as ammeters and
wattmeters for monitoring power flow into the MCC. A low voltage circuit breaker
or automatic transfer switch is sometimes included in the cabinet to interrupt or
transfer the source of the incoming 480 volt power. In addition, small
distribution transformers or distribution panels are often mounted in motor
control center cabinets.
Cabinet Structure
Motor controllers are arranged in vertical stacks or sections within the MCC
assembly. Depending on the manufacturer, vertical sections are attached to each
other in the following ways:
• Each vertical section is fully enclosed on all sides by sheet metal

as if it were a free-standing cabinet. The MCC assembly is
constructed by bolting individual sections together through
adjacent side walls. There are normally penetrations at the top
and bottom of the side walls for routing bus bars or cable between
adjacent sections.
• Adjacent vertical sections are tied to each other through common
cabinet framing. There are partial sheet metal barriers between
sections, but each section is not fully enclosed.
Each section of an MCC is a sheet metal enclosure, usually reinforced at its

corners by overlapping sheet metal bends, or by a framework of steel angles. The
front of the section contains the stack of motor controller cubicles, while the
rear is a closed compartment containing vertical bus bars that tie the primary
circuit into the clip connections at the rear of each cubicle. A vertical
raceway or "gutter" is often provided along one side of each section to carry
control circuit wiring. Figure 1-2 includes a photograph of a three-section MCC,
and a detailed sketch of the structure of a typical MCC section.
Motor control centers may be either single- or double-sided. Double-sided MCCs

have controller cubicles on both the front and rear face of the cabinet, with the
1-3
10446175
vertical bus bars routed through a center compartment between the front and rear
stacks of controller cubicles.
Motor control centers may be either free-standing units or form part of a more
complex assembly. In many cases, MCCs are included in an assembly with
switchgear, distribution panels, and/or transformers (Figure 1-9).
MCC cabinet dimensions are generally standardized. Most MCC sections are 20 to
24 inches wide, and 90 inches tall. The depth of each section varies from 12 to
24 inches, with double-sided sections usually having depths of 20 or 24 inches.
The weight of each section ranges from 500 to 800 pounds.
The number of motor controller cubicles contained in each stack depends on the
NEMA size of the controllers. Size 00 control cubicles are typically 6 inches
tall so that up to ten may be stacked in one MCC section; a single Size 9 control
cubicle fills an entire vertical section.
An alternative to the free-standing motor control center is the wall- or rack-

mounted motor control cubicle. Examples of rack-mounted motor controllers at
sample data base sites are shown in Figures 1-6 (lower photograph) and 1-13.
Within these cubicles, motor control components are bolted to the inner faces of
the wall in the same manner as in a small control or instrument cabinet. Access
to the cubicle is usually through a swinging door that forms the front face of
the cubicle.
The construction of motor control centers is typically governed by industry

standards such as those developed by NEMA and Underwriter's Laboratory (e.g.,
Standard ICS-6, UL-508). These standards define minimum sheet metal thickness as
a function of wall area between reinforcing.
Equipment Anchorage
Free-standing motor control centers are supported on base channels that include
the attachment points for anchorage to the floor. Bolt holes are provided in
the base channel for anchor bolts. Most motor control centers in the data base
are anchored by expansion bolts ranging from 3/8 to 5/8 inch. If the MCC is
mounted on a concrete pad, cast-in-place bolts may anchor the cabinet.
Alternately, the base channel may be spot welded to plates embedded in the
concrete floor.
1-4
10446175
Wall- or rack-mounted cubicles are anchored with bolts either through the rear
wall of the cubicle or through mounting brackets. Unistrut is often used in rack
supports or as the wall attachment. Alternately, the cubicle may be anchored by
expansion bolts directly into a concrete wall.
Equipment Applications
In industrial facilities, conventional power plants, and nuclear plants, motor
control centers are used for the control and electrical fault protection of
motors powered at 600 volts or less. Examples of nuclear plant motor control
centers are presented in Figure 1-3.
1.2 DATA BASE REPRESENTATION FOR MOTOR CONTROL CENTERS

Figures 1-4 through 1-16 present examples of motor control centers within the
data base. The data base inventory of motor control centers includes about 160
examples, representing about 35 sites and 16 of the earthquakes studied in
compiling the data base .. Of this inventory, there are several instances of
anchorage damage and sliding of motor control centers, as well as one case, at
the Fertimex Fertilizer Plant in Mexico, where seismic damage resulted in a loss
of function.
Figure 1-17 presents a bar chart that illustrates the inventory of MCCs at
various data base sites as a function of their estimated peak ground
acceleration.
The general bounds of data base representation for the equipment class of MCCs
are summarized below.
Motor controllers mounted in sheet metal enclosures, as well as rack- and wall-
mounted units, are represented at the voltage of 600 volts or less. Both single-
and double-sided assemblies are represented with a variety of controller sizes
and a number of vertical sections. Motor control center assemblies containing
distribution panels, automatic transfer switches, and relay/instrumentation
compartments are also represented in the experience data base. Motor controllers
are represented in a variety of mounting configurations, ranging from
individually mounted controllers to MCC assemblies in outdoor enclosures. MCC
anchorage ranges from unanchored units to assemblies with four 1/2-inch bolts per
section.
1-5
10446175
Data base representation includes the following components:
• Motor controllers
• Additional components, such as assembly disconnect switches,
automatic transfer switches, and relay/instrumentation compartments
• The assembly enclosure
• Attachments to the enclosure, such as junction boxes
• Attached conduit or cable tray to the nearest building anchor point
Basis for the Generic Bounding Spectrum

The Sylmar Converter Station is one of the major power facilities reviewed in the
SQUG pilot program. The station, located near the fault rupture of the 1971 San
Fernando Earthquake, is estimated to have experienced at least 0.50g peak ground
acceleration, with about ten seconds of strong motion.
The station building is a three-story steel-frame structure. The station

includes 23 MCCs containing approximately 325 motor controllers {Figure 1-5).
There are examples of both single- and double-sided units, ranging from two to
eight sections wide. The assemblies are anchored with either tack welds to
embedded base plates or bolts at the corner of each section. Although one
unanchored unit slid a few inches, all MCCs were undamaged by the earthquake.
El Centro Steam Plant experienced a peak ground acceleration of 0.42g during the
1979 Imperial Valley Earthquake. The duration of strong motion at the site was
about 15 seconds. The site ground motion is based on measurements from an
instrument located within 1/2 mile of the plant.
The plant includes five motor control centers, as well as several rack- mounted
cubicles (Figure 1-6). The units are all single~sided and range from two to five
sections wide. The assemblies are all anchored; typically with two cast-in-place
bolts per section, front and rear. All MCCs were undamaged by the earthquake.
The Union Oil Butane Plant experienced a peak ground acceleration of

approximately 0.60g, with strong motion occurring for about 15 seconds, during
the 1983 Coalinga Earthquake. This PGA is a conservative estimate, based on the
nearest ground motion record of 0.56g {an average of the horizontal components)
recorded much further from the fault.
1-6
10446175
The plant contains an ITE/Gould MCC mounted in an outdoor enclosure (Figure 1-7).
The single-sided MCC is ten sections wide. One section of the unit contains an
automatic transfer switch. The MCC was undamaged by the earthquake.
The Main Oil Pumping Plant, located near the epicenter of the initial shock in
the 1983 Coalinga swarm of earthquakes, experienced a peak ground acceleration of
approximately 0.60g. This PGA is a conservative estimate, based on the nearest
ground motion record of 0.56g (an average of the horizontal components) taken
much further from the fault. The duration of strong motion at the site is
estimated to have been 15 seconds.
The plant contains four MCCs; all of the assemblies slid, but were undamaged by
the earthquake. One of the units, a four-section MCC, is located in an outdoor
enclosure and anchored with eight friction clips held by 3/8-inch expansion
bolts. During the earthquake, ~his unit slid and tore out two of the clip plate
anchor bolts. A second, four-section MCC is located in the control building
(Figure 1-8, upper photograph). The unit was unanchored at the time of the
earthquake and slid several inches. The third MCC is double-sided with cubicles
mounted in five sections. The assembly was unanchored and slid several inches
during the earthquake. The fourth unit is a two-section MCC mounted in an
outdoor enclosure. The outdoor enclosure is anchored with four friction clips
held by 3/8-inch bolts. During the earthquake, the bolts located near an edge of
the concrete pad were pulled as the concrete cracked. Other than anchorage
damage, all MCCs were undamaged by the earthquake.
The Shell Water Treatment Plant is located about two miles north of the Main Oil
Plant. The peak ground acceleration experienced at this site is conservatively
estimated at 0.60g and the ground motion spectrum corresponding to the Union Oil
and Main Oil plants is applicable here.
The plant includes two double-sided Westinghouse MCCs. Each assembly is six
sections wide and contains 32 motor controller cubicles. The MCCs are clamped to
the floor at two places with steel angles that are bolted to embedded 1/2-inch
threaded bars. During the earthquake, the MCCs slipped about 1 inch, but the
anchorage clamps remained intact and the units were undamaged.
The Coalinga Water Treatment Plant is located four miles from the Pleasant Valley
Pumping Plant in the direction of the epicenter of the 1983 Coalinga Earthquake.
1-7
10446175
Peak ground acceleration is estimated at 0.60g, and the ground motion spectrum
applicab1e to the Union Oil and Main Oil plants is used here.
The plant contains one ITE/Gould motor control center which is five sections wide
and has cubicles mounted on one side (Figure 1-8, lower photograph). The
unanchored MCC slid approximately 3 inches during the earthquake, but was not
damaged.
1.3 INSTANCES OF SEISMIC EFFECTS AND DAMAGE

The experience data base includes several instances of seismic effects to MCCs.
In one case, seismically induced damage resulted in a loss of function.
At the Sylmar Converter Station, affected by the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake,
one unanchored MCC slid a few inches. The unit was undamaged.
At the Main Oil Pumping Plant, affected by the 1983 sequence of earthquakes in
Coalinga, all four MCCs slid during the earthquake. One of the units was
anchored with four 3/8-inch bolts per section, two MCCs were anchored with
friction clips held by 3/8-inch expansion bolts, and the fourth unit was
unanchored. In all cases the motor controllers were undamaged.
At the Shell Water Treatment Plant, two MCCs slid during the 1983 Coalinga
earthquakes. The assemblies were clamped to the floor at two places with steel
angles that were bolted to embedded 1/2-inch threaded bars. The motor
controllers were undamaged.
At the Coalinga Water Treatment Plant, an unanchored MCC slid approximately 3

inches during the earthquake, but was not damaged.
At the Rapel Hydroelectric Plant, a General Electric MCC was impacted by a

shorter 13.8 kV switchgear during the 1985 Chile Earthquake (Figure
1-12, lower photograph). The MCC cabinet was dented where the impact occurred.
The motor controllers operated properly after the earthquake.
At the Renca Power Plant, two MCCs, each four sections wide, were unanchored
prior to the 1985 Chile Earthquake. One of the units slid 12 inches. The second
unit tilted, but was prevented from overturning by cable connections at its base.
Neither the MCCs nor the cables were damaged.
1-8
10446175
At the SICARTSA Steel Mill on the Pacific Coast of Mexico, affected by the 1985
Mexico Earthquake, rocking of one MCC broke several tack welds that anchored the
cabinet to embedded steel in the floor. The cabinet did not overturn, and motor
controllers were undamaged.
At the Fertimex Fertilizer Plant on the Mexican Coast, affected by the 1985
Mexico Earthquake, several motor control centers were damaged inside the two-
story Fertilizer Packaging Plant Switchgear Building (Figure 1-14}. The MCCs are
located in the switchgear room on the second floor of the building, about 20 feet
above grade. The room contains twelve motor control centers, manufactured
primarily by CGE of Italy, a European affiliate of General Electric. An assembly
of 480 V switchgear, manufactured by SACE of Italy, is mounted on one side of the
floor.
The MCCs range from 4 to 15 sections wide (Figure 1-15}, with a single 480 V
draw-out circuit breaker mounted in an end section. The cabinets were anchored
with 3/8-inch expansion anchors into the concrete floor with an average of one
bolt per section, front and rear. Three of the twelve assemblies pulled their
anchorage and overturned, causing minor damage to push buttons .and switches on
the front faces of the cabinets.
Some of the MCCs that remained upright experienced permanent deformation in their
cabinet structures. Deformation in the ·longitudinal direction was apparent from
sheared screws that attached the rear sheet metal panels to each section. The
shear deformation in the assembly structures was sufficient to lodge some of the
removable motor control units into their drawers so that they could not be pulled
out of the cabinet easily. Once extracted, the motor controller cubicles
themselves showed deformation and buckling in the sheet metal. In some cubicles,
the deformation was sufficient to crack the insulated casings of internal
components such as contactors.
At the Whakatane Board Mills, affected by the 1987 New Zealand Earthquake,
several slide-mounted motor controllers slid forward from the front face of the
MCC, but did not fall to the floor. When pushed back into position, the motor
controllers remained functional.
At the Sanwa Bank Computer Facility, which experienced an estimated PGA of 0.40g
during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake, a three-section MCC impacted the adjacent
1-9
10446175
wall board during the earthquake (Figure 1-16). The unit, manufactured by
Sylvania, was anchored with 3/8-inch expansion anchors, only in the front of the
cabinet. The unit was not damaged by the earthquake.
Instances of seismically induced damage to motor control centers are known to

have occurred at sites reviewed in an extensive literature search/telephone
survey. These sites are not included in the data base, and few details about the
incidents are known.
Seismic damage to MCCs from inadequate anchorage has occurred at several sites,
including those affected by the 1972 Managua Earthquake (including ENALUF Power
Plant).
1.4 SOURCES OF SEISMIC DAMAGE

The seismic experience data base indicates that motor control centers possess
characteristics which generally preclude damage in earthquakes. With the
exception of poorly anchored (or unanchored) units, the experience data base
demonstrates no additional tendencies for seismic damage to motor control
centers.
1.5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. "IEEE Standard for Qualifying Class IE Motor Control Centers for Nuclear
Power Generating Stations." 1980. IEEE Std 649-1980.
2. Peach, N. December 1962. "Motor Control." Power.
3. Peach, N. June 1963. "Motor Control for Adjustable Speed." Power.
4. Reason, J. February 1981. "AC Motor Control." Power 125, No. 2.
5. "Choosing Solid-State Motor Controls-An Organized Approach."
July 1977. Product Engineering: 47-49.
6. Bak, D. April 6, 1981. "Solid-State Motor Control Gives Smooth Starting."
Design News: 184.
7. Federal Pacific Electric Company. May 1981. "Motor Control Centers, NEMA
Class I, and Class II."
8. General Electric. June 1981. "GE 8000-Line, Motor Control Centers." GEA-
10926.
9. General Electric. April 1969. "GE 7700-Line, Motor Control Centers."
GEH-26148.
10. Westinghouse. January 1983. "Motor Control Center Five Star."
1-10
10446175
11. Westinghouse. July 1981. "Motor Control Center Type W."
12. Square D Company. n.d. "Speed-D Motor Control Centers."
13. Gould Electronics and Electrical Products. n.d. "Gould Series 5600 Motor
Control Centers."
1-11
10446175
Motor starter
(magnetic contactor) Disconnect switch
Terminal block Control transformer
Figure 1-1. Primary components of a typical motor controller.
1-12
10446175
A three-section motor control
center showing cubicles of
various sizes.
Courtesy Siemens-Allis
Courtesy Square D
The construction of a typical

section of a motor control
center.
Figure 1-2. Free-standing motor control centers.
1-13
10446175
Figure 1-3. Motor control centers in typical nuclear plant applications.
1-14
10446175
An automatic transfer switch
mounted in the ITE/Gould MCC at
the Union Oil Butane Plant.
The interior of an automatic

transfer switch mounted in a
General Electric, Type 7700
MCC at the Sylmar Converter
Station.
Figure 1-4. Automatic transfer switches are often mounted in the

cubicles of motor control centers.
1-15
10446175
An eight-section Cutler-Hammer MCC is located in the basement.
A three-section General Electric

MCC is located on the second floor.
Figure 1-5. Motor control centers at the Sylmar Converter

Station. MCCs at the station were undamaged by the
1971 San Fernando Earthquake.
1-16
10446175
A three-section Square D MCC is
located on the ground floor of
the Unit 4 turbine building.
A set of rack-mounted motor control cubicles is located on the ground

floor of the Unit 3 turbine building.
Figure 1-6. Motor control centers at El Centro Steam Plant. MCCs

were undamaged by the 1979 Imperial Valley
Earthquake.
10446175 1-17
An ITE/Gould MCC mounted in an outdoor enclosure.
A motor controller removed from the MCC for repairs to a

thermal overload relay (noted as inoperable prior to the
earthquake).
Figure 1-7. The ITE/Gould motor control center at the Union Oil Butane
Plant.
10446175
1-18
A four-section Furnas Electric
MCC in the control house of the
Main Oil Pumping Plant; the
cabinet was unanchored and slid
several inches without damage.
A five-section ITE/Gould MCC in the pump house of the Coalinga

Water Treatment Plant; the cabinet was unanchored and slid several
inches without damage.
Figure 1-8. Motor control centers located at near-field sites

affected by the Coalinga earthquakes of 1983.
1-19
10446175
Figure 1-9. At the Kettleman Compressor Station, affected by the 1983
Coalinga Earthquake, low voltage switchgear, motor control centers, and
medium voltage switchgear are mounted in the same assembly.
1-20
10446175
Figure 1-10. Westinghouse motor control centers at the Glendale Power
Plant in the San Fernando Valley {upper photograph) and at the Goleta
Substation in Santa Barbara (lower photograph).
1-21
10446175
Figure 1-11. Westinghouse motor control centers at the IBM/Santa Teresa
Facility near Morgan Hill (upper photograph) and at the Renca Power Plant
in Chile (lower photograph).
1-22
10446175
Figure 1-12. General Electric motor control centers at the Humboldt Bay
Power Plant (upper photograph) and at the Rapel Hydroelectric Plant in
Chile (lower photograph).
1-23
10446175
Figure 1-13. Individually mounted motor control cubicles at the Oxiquim
Chemical Plant in Chile (upper photograph) and at the Adak Naval Station
(lower photograph).
1-24
10446175
Figure 1-14. The Solid Materials Handling Facility Substation of the
Fertimex Fertilizer Plant in Mexico is located in a two-story concrete-
frame structure with masonry infill walls. The building experienced
substantial damage to columns and infill panels during the 1985 Mexico
Earthquake.
1-25
10446175
Figure 1-15. In the Solid Materials Handling Facility Substation of the
Fertimex Fertilizer Plant, several electrical cabinets containing both
motor controllers and low voltage circuit breakers were damaged in the
1985 Mexico Earthquake. Three MCC/low voltage switchgear assemblies
pulled their expansion anchors and overturned. In the remaining cabinets,
longitudinal distortion buckled motor controller cubicles, cracking
internal components.
1-26
10446175
Figure 1-16. The Sanwa Bank Computer Facility experienced an estimated
PGA of 0.40g during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake. This motor control
center impacted the adjacent wall board at least three times (judging by
the marks on the wall), but was undamaged by the earthquake.
1-27
10446175
8Z-T
...... o-...,
::s s:u ...... NUMBER OF MOTOR CONTROL CENTERS
c.. V> tO
-'·CDC
(") ~
.... 1\) (.,)
S:US:UCD 0 0 0 0
c+ V> 0
CD ........
c..s:u I 1\)
Ormond Beach Power Plant
........ 0 S'8+==
-+, ....... (Q
C•
::s
(")
c+ til
-'•CD
0 _.
::SCD
(")
BifTIBMI Renca Power P:ant
······················ "'ii~?
Oc+
~CD
c..
tO
~ ...... "'0 Glenda:e Power Plant
o::s
C<
m
::SCD ~
0 Humboldt Bay Power Plant
c..::s
30
c+ "'JJ
!i)
(.,)
0
Burbari< Power Plant
0~ (Q
<+'< 0
...... c
00
::S-t,
3
0
z
0
~
Illa: ;;.:~n::
*
l>c+ 0 0 ~ !_g:
--'0
--~~
0
m $-en ~~(f)
o::.;{]
-'•(")
I
m 0> ~!d:
~ ~~~
::so JJ
V>::S
c+ c+
s:u~
::so
(")--'
~
-1
0
0
~
l~,~~~
llllllllll&llllilllll±illllllillill
Rapel Hydroelectric Plant
Valley Steam Plant ~ [ o ~
c. c:.o3::~.
~ · ~~
CD z
.......
0
(Q
V>(")
~::s
CD ~ !$ SCE Headquarters ~~
CD c+
V> CD
<
m Cal Fed Facility ~~
JJ
~~
c~
_. V> ~
c+
...... !i) - El Centro Steam Plant
~
::s ......
tO c+
:r
.............
m
:I:
0
~pango Substation ~ i
::s::s JJ ~[
_. c+
o:r
N
0 0 ++~~~~==~~~=~~~~~~~~~
:::,, : :! [~
-"'
V>CD
V>
z <11 0::>
.,a
-1 0
OCD
V>
~ (Q iil~
~ ...... I
....... Whitewater Hydroelectric Plant ~~
V>
~3
c ......
::S(")
New Zealand Distiilery ~~
0>
(") ~
c+CD .0
-'•X
O"'C
::SCD
~
s:u ......
~CD
CD::S
(")
0 San Isidro Substation
CD
c.. en @@G%8@88%hlill8l Union Oil, Main Oil. Shell Water.
s:u 0
(Q
sz22:;;;;;;;;szg Coa6nga Water Plants
c+
s:u
10446175
Section 2
LOW VOLTAGE SWITCHGEAR
The equipment class of low voltage switchgear includes electrical fault

protection circuit breakers for systems powered at 600 volts or less (typically
480 volts). The circuit breakers are mounted in sheet metal cubicles which are
typically assembled in vertical stacks. The vertical sections are bolted
together, side-by-side, to form a switchgear assembly.

Low voltage switchgear assemblies consist of one or more circuit breakers, and
associated control relays and instrumentation mounted in a sheet metal enclosure.
The term "low voltage switchgear" is associated with circuits of 600 volts or
less, typically 440 to 480 volts in modern power plants and industrial
facilities.
Circuit Breakers
Low voltage circuit breakers carry currents ranging from 200 to 4000 amperes.
The power circuit protected by an individual breaker may serve a single motor, or
it may feed power to a motor control center or distribution panel where the power
is distributed into secondary circuits.
Most low voltage circuit breakers are the draw-out type. They are mounted on a
rail support system that allows them to be disconnected from their primary
contacts at the rear, and drawn forward out of their sheet metal enclosure for
maintenance. While in operation, the circuit breaker clamps to bus bars in the
rear of the switchgear assembly. Additional positive attachment of the breaker
to its enclosure is made by a mechanical jack or racking mechanism which slides
the breaker in or out of operating position.
A typical low voltage circuit breaker is illustrated in Figure 2-1. The circuit
breaker typically includes the primary components listed below.
2-1
10446175
Spring-actuated electric contacts are designed to quickly open the primary
circuit, thereby avoiding the damage associated with arcing. The contacts are
usually equipped with a shroud of insulating material (the arc quencher or arc
chute), which protects adjacent components during contact actuation. Contact
actuation is driven by mechanical springs that are charged either manually, by a
lever mounted at the front of the breaker, or by a small electric motor mounted
within the breaker.
A closing solenoid is used in some circuit breaker designs to close the primary
contacts. The solenoid compresses a spring once the contacts are closed, which
provides the force to open the contacts quickly when the solenoid deactivates,
tripping the breaker.
Tripping devices are normally based on magnet and coil mechanisms that trip a
latch upon detecting an electrical fault in their control circuitry, releasing
the primary contact springs. Tripping devices and their control circuits operate
at a reduced voltage (typically 120 volts ac). This reduced power is often
supplied through small instrument transformers, mounted in the switchgear
assembly, that step voltage down from the primary circuit.
There are several types of trip devices included in low voltage circuit breakers.
Overcurrent trip devices detect surges in current through the circuit and release
the mechanical linkage that holds the contacts closed. Overcurrent trip devices
are normally adjustable, depending on the level and duration of current surges
corresponding to trip. A shunt trip device is an optional circuit breaker
tripping mechanism that allows the breaker to be tripped by remote control, such
as through a push button, or protective relay. An undervoltage trip device is an
optional mechanism that opens the breaker upon sensing a reduction in system
voltage.
Fuses are sometimes provided as additional overcurrent protection devices to

ensure the interruption of the primary circuit under extreme current surges.
Auxiliary switches provide electrical interties for remote indication of the

circuit breaker condition (open or closed), or for interlocks with other circuit
breakers.
2-2
10446175
Circuit breakers are sized according to the current they carry. Overall circuit
breaker cubicle dimensions range from 20 to 30 inches. The weight of individual
circuit breakers ranges from 150 to 500 pounds.
Switchgear Assembli~s
Low voltage circuit breakers may be included as components of electrical

assemblies containing equipment other than switchgear (e.g., control panels,
motor control centers). In modern power plant applications, however, they are
most commonly mounted together in switchgear assemblies. A typical low voltage
switchgear assembly is illustrated in Figure 2-2.
Switchgear assemblies are composed of vertical sections which normally contain

stacks of two to four circuit breaker cubicles. The vertical section is a sheet
metal enclosure welded to a framework of steel angles or channels. Each section
includes a forward compartment containing the stacked circuit breaker cubicles,
and a rear compartment containing the bus connections for the primary circuits.
A section is typically 90 inches in height and 60 inches in depth. The width of
each section ranges from 20 to 36 inches, depending on the size of the circuit
breakers it carries. A typical section weighs about 2000 pounds.
Minimum standards for the construction of switchgear enclosures are determined by

standards such as those developed by the American National Standards Association
(e.g., ANSI 37.20), which determine minimum sheet metal thickness as a function
of the sheet metal area between support framing.
Individual sections are bolted together through adjoining walls to form an

assembly. Switchgear assemblies may include low voltage circuit breakers only,
or they may be attached to transformers (typically 4160/480 volt) and medium
voltage switchgear to form a unit substation, as illustrated in Figure 2-4 (lower
photograph). Switchgear will occasionally be joined with motor control centers
or switchboards to form a single assembly, as illustrated in Figure 2-7.
Low voltage switchgear assemblies normally include at least one cubicle that
serves as a metering compartment. This compartment typically contains ammeters,
voltmeters, protective relays, and instrument transformers mounted through
cutouts on the cubicle door or to the inner walls of the cubicle.
2-3
10446175
Equipment Anchorage
Switchgear assemblies are typically anchored through bolt holes provided in the
base channel of their interior framing. The assemblies are typically anchored
with either expansion bolts, cast-in-place bolts embedded in the concrete pad
supporting the assembly, or puddle welds to base plates embedded in the concrete
floor.
In industrial facilities, conventional power plants, and nuclear plants, low
voltage switchgear assemblies are used for the electrical fault protection of
systems powered at 600 volts or less. Examples of nuclear plant low voltage
switchgear assemblies are presented in Figure 2-3.
2.2 DATA BASE REPRESENTATION FOR LOW VOLTAGE SWITCHGEAR

Figures 2-4 through 2-14 present examples of low voltage switchgear within the
data base. The data base inventory of low voltage switchgear includes about 70
examples, representing 22 sites and 12 of the earthquakes studied in compiling
the data base. Of this inventory, there are two sites where seismic effects
resulted in a loss of function to low voltage switchgear.
Figure 2-15 presents a bar chart that illustrates the inventory of low voltage
switchgear assemblies at various data base sites as a function of their estimated
peak ground acceleration.
The general bounds of data base representation for the equipment class of low
voltage switchgear are summarized below.
Low voltage switchgear operate at voltages of 600 volts or less. The loading of
circuit breakers in assemblies ranges from half full to full. Low voltage
switchgear combined in assemblies with transformers, distribution panels, medium
voltage breakers, and motor controllers are represented by the experience data
base.
Data base representation includes the following components within a switchgear

assembly:
• Circuit breakers
2-4
10446175
• The switchgear assembly enclosure
• Transformers attached to the assembly
• Relays and instrumentation in the assembly metering compartment
• Attachments to the assembly such as junction boxes
• Attached conduit or cable tray to the nearest anchor point on the
building structure

The station control building is a three-story, steel-frame structure. The

station includes five low voltage switchgear assemblies with approximately
thirty-seven 480 volt breakers (Figure 2-4). The units are all located in the
basement; three include attached dry-type transformers. The assemblies range in
width from three to five sections. During the earthquake, two inadequately
anchored assemblies slid about two inches. All low voltage switchgear assemblies
were undamaged by the earthquake.
The plant includes six low voltage switchgear assemblies, with over eighty 480
volt breakers. There are two switchgear assemblies mounted in outdoor enclosures
which serve the cooling towers (Figure 2-6, upper photograph), and four indoor
units located on the ground floor of each of the four units (Figure 2-5). Two
assemblies include oil-cooled transformers attached at the end (Figure 2-6, lower
photograph). The assemblies range in width from six to thirteen sections.
After the earthquake, certain circuit breakers in one of the outdoor switchgear
assemblies associated with the Unit 3 cooling tower fans would not operate. El
Centro Plant operators and the repair technician who serviced the breaker
following the earthquake attributed the operational failure to the moisture and
2-5
10446175
dirt build-up sensitivity of this particular type of breaker, and not to seismic
loading. These breakers require frequent cycling to ensure "on demand"
operation. All low voltage circuit breakers were undamaged by the earthquake.

The experience data base contains four sites that experienced seismic effects to
low voltage switchgear. At two sites, the damage resulted in a loss of function.
At the Sylmar Converter Station, affected by the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake,
two unanchored switchgear assemblies slid about two inches. The units were
undamaged by the earthquake.
At Las Ventanas Power Plant, affected by the 1985 Chile Earthquake, an unanchored
380 volt switchgear slid 1-1/2 inches. Conduit and cable attached to the top of
the unit held it in place. The switchgear remained operational.
At the San Juan de Llolleo Pumping Plant, affected by the 1985 Chile Earthquake,
the porcelain base of a 400 volt Siemens circuit breaker fractured. The breaker
was located in the main control panel, on the ground floor (Figure 2-11). The
panel is mounted between concrete columns and experienced substantial impact
loads during the earthquake. The fractured circuit breaker was located near a
column which impacted the panel (Figure 2-12). This breaker and its mounting
configuration are not typical of the low voltage breakers found in modern power
plant applications, which do not include porcelain bases. In addition, most
breakers are the draw-out type and are mounted in switchgear cabinets. The
fractured breaker was mounted within the control panel. This damage is not
representative of the types of damage expected for low voltage switchgear
assemblies. The unit and its mounting configuration are somewhat similar to load
interrupt switches that are included in the class of medium voltage switchgear.
At the Fertimex Fertilizer Plant on the Mexican Coast, affected by the 1985
Mexico Earthquake, a low voltage switchgear assembly was damaged inside the two-
story Fertilizer Packaging Plant Switchgear Building (Figure 2-13). The
switchgear is located on the second floor of the building, about 20 feet above
grade. The room contains one assembly of 480 V switchgear, manufactured by SACE
of Italy, and 12 motor control centers, manufactured primarily by CGE of Italy, a
European affiliate of General Electric.
2-6
10446175
The switchgear assembly contains a variety of components, including draw-out
blast circuit breakers, molded case circuit breakers, and metering compartments
(Figure 2-14).
Damage to the switchgear uccurred in the fiberglass supports of vertical bus

bars, mounted in the rear of each section behind the draw-out circuit breakers.
The vertical bus bars run the height of the stack of circuit breakers in each
section, distributing power to each breaker through a semi-flexible three-pronged
connection. The vertical bus bars are supported by blocks of fiberglass
insulation, which span between the rear and center vertical channels of the
cabinet framing.
When the switchgear was tested following the earthquake, micro-cracks were found
in the fiberglass insulation. Since these cracks compromised the electrical
insulation of the bus bars, replacement of the fiberglass supports was required
in several locations of the switchgear assembly. The bus bars themselves were
not damaged.
The cause of the cracks in the bus bars supports was apparently deformation of
the switchgear cabinet structure during the earthquake. In spanning between the
rear and central vertical channels in the cabinet framing, the fiberglass blocks
were probably forced to act as primary elements in resisting shear in the
transverse direction. The rigid insulation was not intended as a load-bearing
member within the switchgear structure, and subsequently cracked under the
seismic deformation.
No additional instances of seismically induced damage to low voltage switchgear

assemblies were found in an extensive literature search/telephone survey.

The seismic experience data base indicates that low voltage switchgear possess
demonstrates no additional tendencies for seismic damage to low voltage
switchgear.
2-7
10446175
2.5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. General Electric Company. n.d. Electric Utility Systems and Practices.
Rustebakke, H. M., ed. 4th Ed. Wiley-Interscience Publications.
2. Nailen, R. L. February 1975. "Is It a Motor or Is It Switchgear?" Power.
3. Smith, R. L. July 1975. "The Meaning Behind Switchgear Nameplates."
Power.
4. Palko, E. December 1971. "Recent Developments and Trends in Low Voltage
Switchgear." Plant Engineering.
5. Siemens-Allis. n.d. "Low Voltage TypeR Metal Enclosed Switchgear."
6. Square D Company. n.d. "POWER-ZONE II Low Voltage Metal Enclosed Drawout
Switchgear."
7. General Electric. n.d. "Low-Voltage Power Circuit Breakers."
8. Westinghouse Electric Corporation. n.d. "Low-Voltage Metal-Enclosed
Switchgear."
9. ITE Imperial Corporation. n.d. "Low Voltage Switchgear - Instructions for
Operation and Maintenance of Circuit Breakers {Metal Base)."
2-8
10446175
Courtesy Westinghouse Electric Corporation
Figure 2-1. Details of a typical low voltage (480 volt) circuit breaker.
2-9
10446175
10. RL-1600 Manually Operated Breaker in Connected Position
1. Meter and Auxiliary Compartment (Page 9)
11. RL-800 Manually Operated Breaker in Connected Position
2. Control Wiring (Page 9)
3. Control Circuit Fuses (Page 6) 12. Future Breaker Compartment (Page 6)
4. Telescopic Breaker Drawout Rails (Page 6) 13. Auxiliary Compartment
5. Stationary Secondary Disconnects (Page 6) 14. Blank Compartment

15. Ventilation Openings (RL-2000, RL-3200 and RL-4000)
6. Breaker Escutcheon Opening
16. Ventilation and Lifting Structure
7. Indicating Instruments
8. RL-3200 Electrically Operated Breaker in Connected Position 17. lnterunit Wiring Trough
9. RL-3200 Electrically Operated Breaker in Test Position
.
15----
,,
I
13--7--
I
14
11
12
Courtesy Siemens-Allis Corporation
Figure 2-2. Primary components of a typical low voltage switchgear

assembly.
2-10
10446175
Figure 2-3. Typical low voltage switchgear in nuclear plant applications.
2-11
10446175
Three of the switchgear assemblies include attached General Electric dry-
type transformers.
Figure 2-4. The Sylmar Converter Station, affected by the 1971 San
Fernando Earthquake, includes five General Electric low voltage
switchgear assemblies, ranging from three to five sections wide.
10446175
This low voltage switchgear assembly, located on the ground floor of Unit
2, is anchored by puddle welds into an embedded steel skid.
A General Electric Type AK-1-25 breaker from the assembly shown

above.
Figure 2-5. El Centro Steam Plant, affected by the 1979 Imperial

Valley Earthquake, includes six General Electric low
voltage switchgear assemblies, ranging from six to
thirteen sections wide.
2-13
10446175
Figure 2-6. El Centro Steam Plant in the Imperial Valley includes two low
voltage switchgear assemblies in an outdoor enclosure {upper photograph)
and four assemblies inside the plant {lower photograph).
2-14
10446175
Coalinga Earthquake, low voltage switchgear, motor control centers, and
2-15
10446175
I
The Renca Power Plant includes three 480 volt switchgear assemblies on the
ground floor with attached dry-type transformers.
A low voltage switchgear assembly, manufactured by AEG, at the Concon

Water Treatment Plant.
Figure 2-8. Typical low voltage switchgear assemblies in facilities

affected by the 1985 Chile Earthquake.
2-16
10446175
Figure 2-9. Low·voltage switchgear at the Adak Naval Station (left
photograph) and at the Puente Hills Landfill Facility near Whittier (right
photograph).
2-17
10446175
Figure 2-10. Low voltage switchgear at the Wells Fargo Bank Data
Processing Facility. The units were undamaged by the 1987 Whittier
Earthquake, in spite of an estimated PGA of 0.40g.
2-18
10446175
!![,
~~t,~~,,
.'
The main control panel, located on the ground floor, experienced impact
forces from an adjacent column.
The damaged Siemens circuit breaker. Note the fracture in the porcelain
casing.
Figure 2-11. At the Llolleo Pumping Plant, affected by the 1985 Chile
Earthquake, the ceramic base fractured on a 400 volt Siemens circuit
breaker mounted in the main control panel.
2-19
10446175
Figure 2-12. The main control panel at the Llolleo Pumping Plant in Chile
is located at the interface of two buildings. Substantial relative
settlement during the earthquake caused impact between a panel containing
a low voltage circuit breaker and an adjacent column. The porcelain base
of the circuit breaker fractured.
2-20
10446175
Figure 2-13. The Solid Materials Handling Facility Substation of the
Fertimex Fertilizer Plant in Mexico is located in a two-story concrete-
frame structure with masonry infill walls. The building experienced
substantial damage to columns and infill panels during the 1985 Mexico
Earthquake.
10446175
2-21
Figure 2-14. The second floor of the Solid Materials Handling Facility
Switchgear Building of the Fertimex Fertilizer Plant includes an assembly
of 480 volt switchgear. Following the earthquake, problems with the bus
bar insulation were found due to micro-cracks in their fiberglass
supports.
10446175
2-22
cCll
15 0:::
* At the San Juan de Lloleo Pumping Plant, the ceramic base failed on a 380 Volt
...
Q)
crclit breaker rnomted flexibily In the rear of tho mail control panel .
** At the Fertrnex Fertiizer Plant. micro-cracks were found in the fiberglasa

0== supports of 480 V sw~chgear bus bar ilsuation o
ll..
(/)
Cll
l·:ij\,:.J,I:.) lndcates a damaged ~ 0
c
Cll
a::
<t
cQ) 'E
w > 'E Cll
G
::r::: (/) ...... c:CCl Cll
0:::
0:::
Cll c E c:
0 ....J ..!!1 0::: () Cll 0
1- 10 ll.. ·;:: Q) :g
3: ~
Q)
......
c
Eo
m ~Q) Ci5 Ci5
f/)
w
::= ..!!1
0 ll.. ~
.....
C/) 0 e
c
~
Q)
G ll.. ~ Q) >. ~
t:::
<t
cCll C:>.<» C::t::: 'R (/) Q) Q)
0 c> cCll"'
~
1- Cll ~ == I .._ Q)
..J
ll..
......
cCll n-wo
..... ll..
oo
Q) -
Cll 0
0 0
> 0::: ~:o "'Q>U.. a.
g!-.8~
N ~
I Q) . c. . ~
"'::;m
N 3: ::= Cll Cl >.
-
+-'c.(/)
w Q) OE.o...._c:EQ) c
0
..J
0
ll..
E ....., ll.. ~ ~ m
~
._
~ ~ 0:::
·a. l5
u. 5 .J::.
()
m ..!!1
...... c: Cll
o I W ·o ~ 0
0 Q)
t-
E
~
a.
()
Cll
~ia~~~!
0 Cll u..
a:: ~
0
Q)
Q)
w 0
m "'C .J::.
~
::> § .3 (/)
z E
~
w .
0 -u..
(ij
0
0
0.20g 0.30g 0.40g 0.50g 0.60g
IN•LV$0 40010.04 SQU0·20 CLASSES
PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION (AVERAGE HORIZONTAL)
Figure 2-15. Selected inventory of low voltage switchgear within the seismic experience data
base as a function of ground motion. All instances resulting in loss of function are
indicated.
10446175
10446175
Section 3
MEDIUM VOLTAGE SWITCHGEAR
The equipment class of medium voltage switchgear includes electrical switching

and fault protection circuit breakers for systems powered between 2400 and 13,800
volts. Medium voltage circuit breakers are mounted in sheet metal cabinets which
are bolted together, side-by-side, to form a switchgear assembly.

Medium voltage switchgear assemblies consist of one or more circuit breakers and
associated control relays and instrumentation mounted in a sheet metal enclosure.
Power plants and industrial facilities typically operate at medium voltage levels
of 2400 or 4160 volts. A medium voltage circuit breaker may serve a single large
motor, or it may feed power to a unit substation transformer which steps power
down to the 480 volt level to supply a low voltage switchgear assembly.
The medium voltage circuit breakers commonly used in power plant applications
include the draw-out type of air-magnetic circuit breakers, and stationary load
interrupter switches. Each type is discussed below.
Air-Magnetic Circuit Breakers

Draw-out, air-magnetic circuit breakers are the basic component of metal-clad
switchgear found in most modern power plant and industrial applications. Metal-
clad switchgear is a subset of medium voltage switchgear, where each circuit
breaker is enclosed in a separate sheet metal compartment. These sheet metal
enclosures isolate each circuit breaker from adjacent breakers, to limit the
propagation of damage from an electrical fault.
Draw-out, air-magnetic circuit breakers are mounted on rollers to allow them to

be wheeled in and out of their individual sheet metal enclosures. There are two
general types of draw-out circuit breakers: the horizontally-racked model and
the vertically-racked model.
3-1
10446175
The horizontally-racked model has clamping bus connections at its rear. It is
racked into operating position by a mechanical jack (often consisting of a
threaded bar) that rolls the circuit breaker into contact with the bus
connections at the rear of its enclosure and secures it in place. The weight of
the circuit breaker rests on the floor of its sheet metal enclosure. One example
of a horizontally-racked breaker removed from its enclosure is shown in Figure 3-
7 (lower photograph).
Vertically-racked circuit breakers roll into position within their enclosure and
are then engaged by a jack built into the walls of the enclosure. The jack lifts
the circuit breaker several inches above the floor, until the clamping
connections atop the circuit breaker contact the bus connections at the top of
the enclosure. The weight of the circuit breaker is then supported on the
framework of the sheet metal enclosure. A vertically-racked breaker, mounted off
the floor in its operating position, is shown in Figure 3-5 (lower photograph).
Air-magnetic circuit breakers normally include the basic components described

below.
Spring-actuated contacts are designed to quickly open the primary circuit,

thereby avoiding the damage associated with arcing. The contacts are equipped
with a shroud of insulating material (the arc chute or arc quencher) that
protects adjacent components during contact actuation. Contact actuation is
driven by mechanical springs that are charged either manually, by a lever mounted
at the front of the breaker, or by a small electric motor mounted within the
breaker.
Tripping devices are normally based on magnet and coil mechanisms that trip a
latch, upon detecting an electrical fault in their control circuitry, releasing
the primary contact springs. Tripping devices and their control circuits operate
at a reduced voltage (typically 120 volts ac). This reduced power is often
supplied through small instrument transformers, mounted in the switchgear
assembly, that step voltage down from the primary circuit. These devices may be
actuated by push buttons, remote switches, or by protective relays mounted
remotely or on the switchgear assembly.
3-2
10446175
Auxiliary switches provide electrical interties for remote indication of the
breaker condition (open or closed), or for interlocks with other circuit
breakers.
Fuses are sometimes provided for additional overcurrent protection in the primary
circuit.
Typical capacities for medium voltage circuit breakers range from 1200 to 3000
amperes. The primary components of a typical air-magnetic circuit breaker are
shown in Figure 3-1.
Load Interrupter Switches

Load interrupter switches perform the load connecting and interrupting function
of circuit breakers, but do not include the same capabilities of electrical fault
protection. Interrupter switcrres are bolted into sheet metal enclosures and are
therefore designated as stationary, rather than draw-out, devices. They are
classified as metal-enclosed rather than metal-clad switchgear, since each
interrupter switch need not be isolated in an individual enclosure.
Like air-magnetic circuit breakers, interrupter switches usually operate with

spring-actuated contacts to ensure quick opening of the primary circuit. The
springs may be charged either by a manual lever mounted outside the sheet metal
enclosure, or by a small motor mounted inside. To provide overcurrent
protection, certain types of interrupter switches include fuses mounted in clips
attached to the interior framing of the enclosure. The primary components of a
load interrupter switch are illustrated in Figure 3-2. An example of a load
interrupter switch included in a unit substation is shown in Figure 3-10 (upper
photograph).
Switchgear Assemblies
Medium voltage circuit breakers or load interrupter switches are often integrated
into unit substations that may include a transformer (typically 4160/480 volt), a
set of low voltage switchgear, or a distribution switchboard. One example of a
unit substation including some of these types of equipment is shown in Figure 3-
9.
3-3
10446175
In most power plant applications, medium voltage switchgear consist of metal-clad
air-magnetic circuit breakers in assemblies (or line-ups), as illustrated in
Figures 3-5 through 3-8.
The basic component of a medium voltage switchgear assembly is the metal-clad

enclosure, typically containing a circuit breaker compartment in the lower
section and a metering compartment in the upper section. The rear of the
enclosure is a separate compartment for primary electrical connections. The
enclosure consists of sheet metal panels welded to a supporting frame of steel
angles or channels. Individual enclosures are typically 90 inches in height and
approximately 90 inches in depth. The width of an enclosure typically varies
from 24 to 36 inches, depending on the size of the circuit breaker within. The
weight of a metal-clad enclosure ranges from 2000 to 3000 pounds, with the
circuit breaker, itself, weighing from 600 to 1200 pounds. A typical metal-clad
enclosure is illustrated in Figure 3-3.
Minimum standards for the construction of switchgear enclosures are determined by

standards such as those developed by the American National Standards Association
(e.g., ANSI 37.20}, which determines minimum sheet metal thickness as a function
of the sheet metal area between support framing.
Electro-mechanical relays are mounted either to the swinging doors at the front
of the enclosure, or to the interior of the metering compartment. The relays
detect electrical faults in the primary circuit served by the breaker, and
initiate a control signal to the breaker tripping device. Relays are typically
inserted through cutouts in the door and secured by screws through a mounting
flange into the sheet metal. The metering compartment may also contain
components such as ammeters, voltmeters, and hand switches for monitoring the
primary circuit or manually initiating a circuit breaker trip. These control and
instrumentation components are powered at reduced voltages (typically 120 volts
ac). Power may be supplied from the primary circuit by a small instrumentation
transformer mounted in the metering compartment.
Equipment Anchorage
Switchgear assemblies are typically anchored using bolt holes provided in the
base channel of their interior framing. They are typically anchored with either
expansion bolts, cast-in-place bolts embedded in a concrete supporting pad, or
puddle welds to steel base plates embedded in the concrete floor.
3-4
10446175
Equipment Application
In industrial facilities, conventional power plants, and nuclear plants, medium
voltage switchgear is used for the electrical switching and fault protection of
systems powered between 2400 and 13,800 volts. Examples of nuclear plant medium
voltage switchgear are presented in Figure 3-4.
3.2 DATA BASE REPRESENTATION FOR MEDIUM VOLTAGE SWITCHGEAR

Figures 3-5 through 3-13 present examples of medium voltage switchgear within the
data base. The data base inventory of medium voltage switchgear includes about
75 examples, representing 30 sites and 13 of the earthquakes studied in compiling
the data base. Of this inventory, there are no instances where seismic effects
caused a loss of function in medium voltage switchgear.
Figure 3-14 presents a bar chart that illustrates the inventory of medium voltage
switchgear assemblies at various data base sites as a function of their estimated
peak ground acceleration.
The general bounds of data base representation for the equipment class of medium
voltage switchgear assemblies are summarized below.
Circuit breakers mounted in sheet metal enclosures, either vertically or

horizontally, are represented in the voltage range between 2400 and 13,800 volts.
Draw-out magnetic circuit breakers are represented, as well as load interrupter
switches. Medium voltage switchgear assemblies combined with low voltage
switchgear, motor control centers, and distribution panels are represented by the
experience data base. Switchgear anchorage schemes include friction clips,
expansion bolts, cast-in-place bolts, and welds to embedded steel.
Data base representation of medium voltage switchgear assemblies includes the

following components:
• Air-magnetic circuit breakers or load interrupter switches

• The switchgear assembly enclosure
• Relays and instrumentation mounted on the enclosure and in the
metering compartments
• Attached transformers
• Attachments to the assembly such as junction boxes
3-5
10446175
• Attached conduit and cable trays to the nearest anchor point on the
building structure

acceleration, with about 10 seconds of strong motion.
The station control building is.a three-story, steel-frame structure. The

station includes one assembly of medium voltage switchgear with nineteen 4.16 kV
breakers (Figure 3-5). The assembly is located in the basement. The assembly
was undamaged by the earthquake.
The plant includes seven medium voltage switchgear assemblies, with approximately
sixty 2.4 kV breakers (Figure 3-6). The units, manufactured by General Electric,
are located on the plant operating floor, 30 feet above grade elevation. The
assemblies range from four to sixteen sections in width. All assemblies were
ground motion record of 0.56g (an average of the horizontal components), measured
at the Pleasant Valley Pumping Plant. The duration of strong motion at the Main
Oil Plant site is estimated to have been 15 seconds.
The plant includes two medium voltage switchgear that are located at ground level
(Figure 3-7). During the earthquake, one assembly of 4.16 kV switchgear located
in the control building sheared its anchor bolts and slid. Sliding stopped when
the bottom framing channel impacted a conduit flange embedded in the floor. The
sheet metal cladding and the steel framing of several circuit breaker sections
was distorted, due to the impact with the conduit flange. During the two day
3-6
10446175
period that the facility was without power, technicians removed the draw-out
circuit breakers and, with the aid of mechanical jacks, removed the distortions
in the cabinet structure. The circuit breakers were then replaced in the
assembly, and when power was restored all components were found to be operable.
A second 2.4 kV assembly at the site, mounted in an outdoor enclosure, slipped

from its anchor clips and slid one inch. The assembly was undamaged.
The Coalinga Water Treatment Plant is located four miles from the Main Oil Plant
in the area of the epicenter of the 1983 Coalinga Earthquake. Peak ground
acceleration is estimated at 0.60g, and the ground motion spectrum applicable to
the Main Oil Plant is used here.
The plant includes one assembly of 4.16 kV switchgear. The switchgear is located
in an outdoor enclosure, attached to the substation transformer. During the
earthquake, the unit slipped from its anchor clips and slid about two inches
damaging a short section of attached conduit. In spite of the sliding, the
assembly was undamaged by the earthquake.

The experience data base includes four sites that experienced effects to medium
voltage switchgear.
At the Main Oil Pumping Plant, affected by the 1983 Coalinga Earthquake, one
assembly of 4.16 kV switchgear, located in the control building, sheared its
anchor bolts and slid (Figure 3-7). Each section of the switchgear was anchored
with two 5/8-inch expansion bolts in the rear of the cubicle. Sliding of the
assembly stopped when the bottom framing channel impacted a conduit flange
embedded in the floor. The impact of the cabinet on the floor flange dented the
bottom channel and distorted the cabinet walls. Prior to placing the switchgear
back into service, technicians rolled out several of the air circuit breakers
and, with the aid of mechanical jacks, bent the cabinet walls and framing back
into proper alignment. The circuit breakers were then replaced and the
switchgear assembly was pushed back into its original position. It is not known
whether or not the circuit breakers would have functioned immediately after the
earthquake.
3-7
10446175
A second 2.4 kV assembly, mounted in an outdoor enclosure, slipped from its
anchor clips and slid one inch. Both switchgear assemblies were operable once
power was restored to the plant.
At the Coalinga Water Treatment Plant, affected by the 1983 Coalinga Earthquake,
an assembly containing the substation transformer and attached 4.16 kV switchgear
slipped from its anchor clips and slid about two inches. This movement cracked a
short section of plastic conduit running between the assembly and its concrete
pad. Neither the electrical connections in the conduit nor the switchgear
assembly were damaged.
At the Rapel Hydroelectric Plant, which experienced an average peak ground

acceleration of 0.40g during the 1985 Chile Earthquake, a 13.8 kV switchgear
cabinet experienced structural damage. The switchgear assembly, manufactured by
Reyrolle of England, is about 4 feet tall, and individual sections are not bolted
together. The cabinet is an open-frame structure with no rear sheet metal wall.
Lateral restraint is provided by a single diagonal strap per section; all straps
were oriented in the same direction. During the earthquake the diagonal strap
for each cabinet buckled slightly, the side wall buckled, and the wall stiffeners
bent. In spite of the structural damage, the switchgear remained operational.
At the Adak Naval Station, which experienced an estimated PGA of 0.25g during the
1986 Alaska Earthquake, a substation was tripped due to actuation of a General
Electric IBCG protective relay on a 13.8 kV switchgear (Figure 3-13, lower
photograph). Once the relay was reset, the substation went back on-line, and
normal operation resumed.
No additional instances of seismically induced damage to medium voltage, metal-

clad switchgear assemblies were found in an extensive literature search/telephone
survey.

The seismic experience data base indicates that medium voltage switchgear possess
charactetistics which generally preclude damage in earthquakes. With the
includes no instances of seismic damage to medium voltage switchgear.
3-8
10446175
3.5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. General Electric Company. n.d. Electric Utility Systems and Practices.
Homer M. Rustebakke, ed. 4th Ed. New York, NY: Wiley-Interscience.
2. Nailen, R.L. February 1975. "Is It a Motor or Is It Switchgear?" Power.
3. Smith, R. L. July 1975. "The Meaning Behind Switchgear Nameplates."
Power.
4. General Electric. n.d. "Metal-Clad Switchgear."
5. General Electric. n.d. "Magne-Blast Circuit Breaker."
6. Westinghouse Corp. n.d. "H.V. Metal-Clad Switchgear."
7. ITE Imperial Corporation. n.d. "Metal-Clad Switchgear, Renewal Parts."
8. Siemens-Allis Corporation. n.d. "High Voltage Controllers."
9. Square D Corporation. n.d. "Power-Zone HVL Load Interrupter Switchgear."
3-9
10446175
ARC CHUTES
ARC CHUTE
RETAINING.
PLATES ·,
BREAKER ARCING
'
CONTACTS
ARCING HORN
CONNECTOR
SILVER MAIN
,PUFFER
OPERATING ROD
MULTI-POLE
.ROTARY
BREAKER.
AUXILIARY·
SWITCH
LEVERING-IN
DEVICE SHAFT
MAINTENANCE
TRIP LEVER
TRIP SOLENOID
TWO -SURFACE
ALL WELDED
WHEELS.
STEEL FRAME
CONSTRUCTION
Figure 3-1. The primary components of a typical (older vintage) air-

magnetic medium voltage circuit breaker.
3-10
10446175
Permanently attached
handle direct acting
up to close ~
• Welded switch
frame work
down to open ~ supports entire
switch mechanism
High strength glass-polyester

insulating links
Switch drive shaft and

connecting linkage
Stored energy switch

operating mechanism
----Travel stop
Fuses installed in fuse clips mounted

on NEMA classed polyester insulators
Full length glass fiber reinforced

polyester phase barriers
SQUARE D TYPE HVL LOAD INTERRUPTER SWITCH

WITH BORIC ACID TYPE FUSES
Courtesy Square D Corporation
Figure 3-2. The primary components of a fused-load interrupter switch.
3-11
10446175
•
• I l l~
••
. l .i G .
.•• ···~I
I_
OJ .
~
. 11 ~
9.
0 ., ' fl Jl ----
91 {Ill Gif1! - -. ::
1. SOLENARC DSE CIRCUIT BREAKER ELEMENT

2. CIRCUIT BREAKER CELL
3. RELAY AND INSTRUMENT COMPARTMENT
4. CABLE TERMINATION COMPARTMENT
5. BUSSING STRUCTURE
Courtesy Square D Corporation
Figure 3-3. A typical medium voltage switchgear assembly, and the primary
components of an individual metal-clad section.
3-12
10446175
Figure 3-4. Medium voltage switchgear in nuclear plant applications.
3-13
10446175
The medium voltage switchgear contains 19 sections.
Typical General Electric air-

magnetic circuit breaker,
mounted vertically in the
assembly.
Figure 3-5. The Sylmar Converter Station includes one General Electric
medium voltage switchgear assembly. The unit, located in the basement of
the station, is anchored with 3/8-inch cast-in-place bolts.
3-14
10446175
Figure 3-6. El Centro Steam Plant includes seven assemblies of medium
voltage, metal-clad switchgear. The units, manufactured by General
Electric, are located on the plant operating floor.
3-15
10446175
This switchgear is part of an assembly including motor control centers and
load-disconnect switches. Each section was anchored with two 5/8-inch
expansion bolts in the back of the cubicle.
The switchgear assembly includes

six General Electric Magne-blast
circuit breakers.
Figure 3-7. The Main Oil Plant in Coalinga includes two medium voltage
switchgear assemblies. This unit sheared its anchor bolts and slid
several inches during the 1983 earthquake. Sliding stopped when the
bottom framing channel impacted a conduit flange embedded in the floor.
The circuit breakers were undamaged.
3-16
10446175
Figure 3-8. Medium voltage switchgear assemblies mounted in outdoor
enclosures at the Valley Steam Plant in the San Fernando Valley {upper
photograph) and at the IBM/Santa Teresa Facility near Morgan Hill {lower
photograph).
3-17
10446175
Coalinga Earthquake, motor control centers, low voltage switchgear, and
3-18
10446175
A Federal Pacific Electric
Company, 600 amp, 13.8 kV
load interrupter switch.
Figure 3-10. The IBM/Santa Teresa Facility, affected by the 1984 Morgan
Hill Earthquake, includes an assembly containing (from left to right) a
load interrupter switch, dry-type unit substation transformers, low
voltage circuit breakers, and associated instrumentation.
3-19
10446175
The Renca Power Plant includes two 2.4 kV switchgear assemblies, located
on the ground floor.
The Concan Pumping Plant includes an assembly of AEG medium voltage

switchgear on the ground floor.
Figure 3-11. Typical medium voltage switchgear assemblies at facilities

3-20
10446175
Figure 3-12. Medium voltage switchgear assemblies at the Puente Hills
Landfill Facility. These units were undamaged in the 1987 Whittier
Earthquake.
3-21
10446175
Figure 3-13. Medium voltage switchgear assemblies at the Adak Naval
Station. The arrow in the lower photograph shows the protective relay
that actuated and tripped a substation off-line during the 1986 Adak
Alaska Earthquake.
3-22
10446175
£Z-£
...... 0... "'T'1

::::::5 g., ...... NUMBER OF MEDIUM VOLT AGE SWITCHGEAR
c.. c-i"C.C
...... ~ c
n ""'l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
ll> C'" C'O 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0
c-i"ll> 0~~ . .
C'OV>W
C..C'O _.I
~ Ormond Beach Power Plant
ll>~
V>•
co Adak Naval Station
ll>
-t,C'O
(/)
$21£Jhl Las Ventanas Power Plant. Copper Refinery
......
·················••l~.•~•~~g~~;n::c;~~:r Plant
~
::::SC'O
nn
c-i" c-i"
~-ro
0 c..
::::s
o::::s -c · · · · · · · · · · · · • Glendale Power Plant
-T>< m
C'O ~ 0 _ · ·~·~·~·~ Laguna Verde Power Plant
c.c::::s
gco~
""'le-i"
00 " •-•••-•n Humboldt Bay Power Plant
•.:.·~·~ · Burbark Power Plant
~""'l
::::S'<
c..
0
0
3-t, ~ Mesquite Lake Facility
~
M-3
~-C'O
oc..
U San Luis Canal Pumping Stations
::::s ~.
~ ~ I/ Kawerau Substation
3 r-
)><
-'0
~ <<···~ ·~····
IBM \Santa Teresa Facility
c-i" ~ 0 _ Cal Fed Facility
~-ll>
::::sc.c
V>C'O 0z 0~ ·~· ·:.:·~1 Valley Steam Plant
c-i"
ll>V>
::::s:e:
~ co Flapel Hydroelectric Plant
n
~
~.
C'Oc-i"
V> n JJ
E:1 Centro Steam Plant
;:s-
""'SC.C l>
C'O C'O G)
V>ll> m
~""'l
---' :I:
M-:E 0
............ JJ
::::sc-i"
c.c :::::r N Whitewater Hydroelectric Plant
~.
0 0 ..
~-::::s
::::s
z·
-1 ~
c-i" Sylmar Converter Station
---' :::::r l> 0
OC'O ,co
~
V>
V>V>
C'O
0 ~.
-T)V> Pleasant Valley Pumping Station
3
-1') ~.
~n
::::s
nro
M"X
~--o
OC'O
~·~~~~~~n~~ ~::n~~ ::er Treatment ~ant

::::S""'S
~
ll>C'O
""'S::::S
ron
C'O Ul
10446175
10446175
Section 4
TRANSFORMERS
Transformers critical to s.afe shutdown systems in nuclear plants include the unit
substation type, typically 4160/480 volts, and the distribution type, typically
480/120 volts. This equipment class includes both liquid- and air-cooled
transformers, mounted to either a floor or a wall. Main power transformers with
primary voltages greater than about 13,800 volts are not included in this class.
Small transformers that are components of electrical equipment, such as motor
control centers or control panels, are also not included in this class but are
addressed as components of other classes of electrical cabinetry.

The equipment class of transformers includes the unit substation type and the
distribution type. Each type is discussed in the paragraphs below.
Unit Substation Transformers

Unit substation transformers typically have primary voltages of 2400 to 4160
volts, and secondary voltages of 480 volts. These transformers are usually
categorized as secondary unit substation transformers~ They receive their input
from primary unit substation transformers that step voltage down from
transmission line levels to the 2400 to 4160 volt level.
Unit substation transformers may be either liquid- or air-cooled. Liquid-cooled

units typically consist of a rectangular steel tank filled with oil or a similar
insulating fluid. The transformer coils are submerged in a liquid bath which
provides cooling and insulation within the steel tank casing. Most liquid-filled
transformers have one or more radiator coils attached to the side of the
transformer to provide sufficient surface area for cooling. The basic components
of a typical liquid-cooled unit substation transformer are shown in Figure 4-1
(lower photograph). Examples of liquid-cooled transformers at data base sites
are shown in Figures 4-7 and 4-11.
4-1
10446175
Air-cooled or dry-type unit substation transformers are similar in size and
construction to liquid-cooled units, except the transformer coils are mounted in
a ventilated steel enclosure, rather than a liquid bath. Most air-cooled
transformers rely on natural convection cooling through the louvered or
perforated sections of their casings. Larger air-cooled unit substation
transformers may have small fans mounted in their enclosures for forced air
cooling. Examples of air-cooled unit substation transformers at data base sites
are shown in Figures 4-6 and 4-9.
The casings of both liquid-cooled and air-cooled unit substation transformers

have typical overall dimensions of 60 to 100 inches in height, and 40 to 100
inches in width and depth. The weights of these units range from 2,000 to 15,000
pounds, depending on their power output. Transformer capacity is measured in
kilovolt-amperes (kVA}, with capacities typically ranging from 100 to 3000 kVA.
Most transformers used in power plant applications are three-phase, meaning they
contain three core-coils in an assembly. A typical dry-type core-coil assembly
is illustrated in Figure 4-3. The windings for the primary and secondary
circuits surround a laminated steel core, which in the particular model in the
figure is clamped into a heavy steel frame at the base. The base frame for the
core-coil assembly is, in turn, bolted to the base framing for the enclosing
sheet metal casing.
Normally, unit substation transformers are supported on a concrete pad. Typical

anchorage uses bolts embedded in the concrete pad and routed through bolt holes
provided in the base channel of the transformer casing. The data base also
includes examples of transformers that are anchored by clips, and are often
bolted by expansion anchors into a concrete pad.
Distribution Transformers
Distribution transformers typically have primary voltages of 480 volts stepping
down to secondary voltages of 120 to 240 volts. This type of transformer is
almost always air-cooled, although a few examples of liquid-cooled distribution
transformers are found in older data base facilities. The construction of
distribution transformers is essentially the same as that of unit substation
transformers, except for a difference in size. Air-cooled distribution
transformers may be either ventilated or encapsulated. The larger units are
usually ventilated, with the cooling of coils accomplished by natural air
4-2
10446175
convection through vents in the transformer casing. Encapsulated units are also
cooled by natural convection, but depend on sufficient heat transfer between the
enclosed atmosphere surrounding the coils and the casing wall.
The range of size in typical distribution transformers is illustrated in Figure

4-4. The smallest wall-mounted units have overall dimensions of about 10 inches
in height, width, and depth, and weights of 50 to 100 pounds. Larger units are
typically floor-mounted with dimensions ranging up to the size of unit substation
transformers and weights ranging up to 5000 pounds. Examples of distribution
transformers at data base sites are shown in Figure 4-10.
Distribution transformers are usually anchored by bolts through a base channel or

mounting brackets into the supporting floor, steel frame, or wall. Expansion
anchors are often used, due to the relatively light weight of most distribution
transformers.
Unit substation transformers step power down from the medium voltage levels
(typically 4160 volts) used in large mechanical equipment, to lower voltage
levels (typically 480 volts) required for most smaller equipment, such as pumps,
fans, motor-operated valves, and air compressors. A unit substation transformer
is normally associated with an assembly of switchgear, one or more motor control
centers, or switchboards that distribute power to specific equipment.
Distribution transformers usually step power from the 480 volt level to the 120
to 240 volt level to operate small mechanical equipment, battery chargers, or
lighting systems. A distribution transformer is normally associated with one or
more distribution panels for distributing power to specific lighting circuits or
small appliances.
Application in Nuclear Plants

In nuclear plants, transformers are used to step power from medium levels (4160
volts) down to levels ranging from 120 to 480 volts, to supply power to
mechanical systems that include critical equipment. Examples of nuclear plant
transformers are shown in Figure 4-5.
4-3
10446175
4.2 DATA BASE REPRESENTATION FOR TRANSFORMERS
Figures 4-6 through 4-13 present examples of transformers within the data base.
The data base inventory of transformers includes about 85 examples, representing
32 sites and 12 of the earthquakes studied in compiling the data base. Of this
inventory there is one example, at the SICARTSA Steel Mill in Mexico, of an
immediate loss of function to a transformer caused by seismic effects, and three
sites that experienced post-earthquake damage to transformers.
Figure 4-14 presents a bar chart that illustrates the inventory of transformers
at various data base sites as a function of their estimated PGA.
The general bounds of data base representation for the equipment class of
transformers are summarized below.
Dry-type and oil-filled transformers are represented in the voltage ranges of

both unit substation transformers (12000-2400 volts stepping down to 480-380
volts) and distribution transformers (480 volts stepping down to 120 volts).
Transformers are represented with capacities ranging up to about 4000 kVA for
unit substation transformers, and up to about 170 kVA for distribution
transformers. Free-standing unit substation transformers, as well as those
attached to motor control centers or switchgear assemblies, are represented in
the data base. Distribution transformers include floor-mounted, wall-mounted,
and rack-mounted units that are free-standing, as well as attached to the
exterior of cabinets. Transformer anchorage ranges from unanchored units to
units with l-inch anchor bolts.
• Transformer enclosure with internals

• Attached cable and conduit between the transformer and the nearest
building anchor point

The Svlmar Converter Station is one of the major power facilities reviewed in the
Fernando Earthquake, is estimated to have experienced at least 0.50g PGA, with
about ten seconds of strong motion.
4-4
10446175
The station control building is a three-story steel-frame structure. It contains
five unit substation transformers, stepping voltage from 4160 to 480 volts for
motor control centers and low voltage switchgear (Figure 4-6). The units are all
located in the basement of the station and are air-cooled, dry-type transformers.
Although switchyard transformers were extensively damaged, there was no damage to
unit substation transformers at this facility during the earthquake.
El Centro Steam Plant experienced a PGA of 0.42g during the 1979 Imperial Valley
Earthquake. The duration of strong motion at the site was about 15 seconds. The
site ground motion is based on measurements from an instrument located within 1/2
mile of the plant.
The concrete shear wall turbine building includes five unit substation
transformers stepping voltage from 2400 volts to 480 volts for use in low voltage
switchgear (Figure 4-7). Three of the units are oil-cooled transformers
manufactured by General Electric Company. The other two units are dry-type
transformers, also manufactured by General Electric. All transformers were

the 1983 Coalinga Earthquake. This PGA is a conservative estimate based on the
nearest ground motion record of 0.56g (an average of the horizontal components)
recorded at the Pleasant Valley Plant, much further from the fault.
Five distribution transformers which step voltage from 480 to 120 volts are
located in the plant yard. Two are manufactured by International Transformer
Company and are anchored to concrete pads with four 1/4-inch anchor bolts (Figure
4-8, upper photograph). Three other transformers, manufactured by Acme Electric
Company, are anchored with four 3/8-inch anchor bolts. There was no damage to
any transformers at this facility by the 1983 sequence of Coalinga earthquakes.
The Main Oil Pumping Plant is located near the epicenter of the initial shock in
the 1983 Coalinga sequence of earthquakes. The ground motion spectrum recorded
at the Pleasant Valley Plant is applicable to the nearby Main Oil Pumping Plant
site.
4-5
10446175
The plant includes two outdoor oil-filled unit substation transformers (Figure 4-
8, lower photograph). The units are free-standing and step voltage from 2400 to
480 volts. One unit was anchored with clips that were welded to the transformer
base and bolted into a concrete pad. The second unit was unanchored. Both
transformers slid and broke a short section of conduit routed into their concrete
pads. The conduit break caused an electric ground fault in one unit several
months after the earthquake.
The Pleasant Valley Pumping Plant recorded ground motion closest to the epicenter
of the 1983 sequence of Coalinga earthquakes. Strong-motion monitors are located
in the station switchyard as well as in the basement, operating floor, and on the
roof of the station building. The monitor located in the switchyard (free-field)
recorded an average horizontal peak ground acceleration of 0.56g, with a duration
of strong motion of about 15 seconds.
The plant switchyard includes one oil-filled unit substation transformer. The
unit steps voltage from 4160 to 480 volts and is attached to a 4160 volt circuit
breaker. The unit is anchored with four l-inch bolts and was undamaged by the
earthquake.

The experience data base includes five sites that experienced seismic damage to
transformers. At one site, the damage resulted in the immediate loss of function
of the transformer. At three other sites, transformers remained operable but
required repair/replacement following the earthquake.
At the Main Oil Pumping Plant, two transformers slid during the 1983 sequence of
earthquakes in Coalinga. Both units were Sierra Transformer Company, unit
substation transformers (2400/480 volt), located in the yard (Figure 4-8, lower
photograph). In one case, anchorage consisted of four small clips (2-1/2" x 1-
1/2" x 1/4") acting as sliding restraints. The clips were not sufficient to
restrain the 5,000 pound transformer; the unit slid up to three inches. Several
months later a short circuit developed in one transformer. This damage was
attributed to a break in the short section of conduit routed beneath the
transformer into the concrete pad.
4-6
10446175
At the Coalinga Water Filtration Plant, the substation transformer and attached
switchgear slipped from their anchor clips and slid about 2 inches during the
1983 Coalinga Earthquake. The assembly was not damaged.
At the SICARTSA Steel Mill, affected by the 1985 Mexico Earthquake, an

unanchored, oil-filled transformer suffered an internal short circuit. According
to SICARTSA electrical engineers, a ground fault occurred in an internal bus
connection of the transformer, burning windings in one coil. Detailed
investigations of the failure revealed that the ground fault was caused by a loss
of insulation between a live and a grounded bus connection. Within this
particular model of transformer, adjacent bus connections are insulated by paper
strips inserted between the bus bars. The paper insulation is held in place by
friction only, and therefore tends to slip out of position under vibration or
slight distortion of the bus bars.
The SICARTSA electrical engineers remarked that there had been perhaps ten
instances of similar short circuits in these transformers prior to the
earthquake. In all cases, the cause was paper insulation slipping out of place
due to normal operational vibration of the transformer. This problem seems to be
a defect in the particular model of transformer.
The SICARTSA transformers rest unanchored on concrete pads. The slipping

insulation may have been aggravated during the earthquake by rocking of the
transformers, which may have added impact loads to the transformer internals. It
is of interest to note that none of the other transformers suffered damage in the
earthquake, in spite of their lack of anchorage.
At Adak Naval Station, which experienced an estimated PGA of 0.25g during the
1986 Alaska Earthquake, two unanchored dry-type transformers (one unit
substation, one distribution) slid about 1/2 inch ·(Figure
4-12). The units were not damaged.
At the Wells Fargo Bank Computer Facility, affected by the 1987 Whittier
Earthquake, an unanchored transformer slid about 1 inch, but was not damaged.
At the California Federal Bank Computer Facility, which experienced a PGA in

excess of 0.40g during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake, two dry-type distribution
transformers, located on the third and fourth floors of the building, suffered
10446175
4-7
damage (Figure 4-13). The internal core-coil assembly was bolted to the base of
a lightweight inverted channel inside the enclosure. During the earthquake, the
(
channel deformed to the extent that the core-coil impacted and damaged the
enclosure siding. Both units functioned through the earthquake, but were taken
out of service following the event, due to excessive noise.
Similar damage occurred at the Sanwa Bank Computer Facility, which .experienced an
estimated PGA of 0.40g during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake. Following the
earthquake, a small dry-type distribution transformer required replacement. The
75 kVA unit was operational following the earthquake, but was unusually noisy.
An inspection of the transformer internals revealed that the bolts holding the
support frame for the core assembly had loosened. In addition, the frame and
coils were distorted.
Instances of seismically induced damage to transformers are known to have

occurred at many sites not specifically surveyed in compiling the data base.
Seismic damage is typically the result of inadequately anchored transformers.

The seismic experience data base indicates that transformers possess
characteristics which generally preclude damage in earthquakes. The few
instances of seismic effects demonstrate the following seismic vulnerabilities
for transformers:
• Anchorage. Transformers, which are unanchored or poorly anchored,

have slid at several data base sites.
• Core-Coil Supports. Small, dry-type, distribution transformers
have distorted sufficiently to arc against their enclosures at two
data base sites. In both cases, the units functioned following the
earthquake, but were replaced shortly thereafter.
4.5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Baumeister, T., ed. 1979. Mark's Standard Handbook for Mechanical
Engineers. 8th Ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
2. Westinghouse Electric Corporation. n.d. "Westinghouse Quick Selector."
Catalog 25-000. 9th Ed.
3. SquareD Company. n.d. "SquareD Company Digest." Number 163.
4. Rustebakke, H., ed. n.d. Electric Utility Systems and Practices. Chapter
8. 4th Ed. New York, NY: Wiley-lnterscience.
4-8
10446175
5. Stein, H. L. May 1985. "Transformers." Specifying Engineer.
6. O'Connor, J. J. June 1952. "Power's Handbook on Transformers." Power.
4-9
10446175
Courtesy Sorge! Transformers,
Square D Company
Figure 4-1. The internal core-coil assembly and the enclosing casing for
typical dry-type (upper photograph) and liquid-filled (lower photograph)
unit substation transformers.
4-10
10446175
Drip-proof enclosure
with
baffled vent louvres
Rigid steel
core clamps
Sturdy
wire wound
coils
Heavy gauge
sheet steel enclosure
and base .••
Rigid punched
bottom
Rigidly mounted
terminals Flexible ground strap
Neoprene
isolation mounts
Courtesy Square D Company
Figure 4-2. The internal core-coil assembly and the enclosing sheet metal
casing for a ventilated dry-type distribution transformer.
4-11
10446175
Courtesy Square 0
Company
1 9 LV Leads
2 10 Link for HV Taps
3 Core 11 Upper Core Yoke
4 Core Straps 12 Lifting Holes
5 Lower Core Clamp 13 Upper Support Blocks
6 Core Clamping 14 Lower Support Blocks
Hardware
7 Mounting Feet
8 HV Connections
Figure 4-3. The components of a typical three-phase core-coil assembly

for a dry-type unit substation transformer. The upper right photograph
shows the assembled core-coils bolted to the base framing for the
enclosing sheet metal casing.
4-12
10446175
Figure 4-4. The range of sizes for typical air-cooled distribution

transformers, including both ventilated and encapsulated units.
4-13
10446175
Figure 4-5. Unit substation transformers in nuclear plant applications.
4-14
10446175
Figure 4-6. These dry-type transformers at the Sylmar Converter Station,
affected by the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake, form part of unit
substations. They step voltage from 4160 volts to 480 volts, to be used
for motor control centers (upper photograph) or low voltage switchgear
(lower photograph).
4-15
10446175
Figure 4-7. Oil-cooled unit substation transformers at El Centro Steam
Plant. These unit substations (including switchgear and transformers)
were manufactured by General Electric Company between 1957 and 1968.
4-16
10446175
This 480/120 V dry-type
transformer at the Union Oil
Butane Plant is anchored with
four 1/4-inch anchor bolts.
One of two oil-cooled unit substation transformers in the yard of the

Main Oil Pumping Plant.
Figure 4-8. Examples of transformers in the area affected by the 1983

Coalinga Earthquake.
4-17
10446175
Figure 4-9. Dry-type transformers at the Evergreen College in Morgan Hill
(upper photograph) and at the Humboldt Bay Power Plant (lower photograph).
4-18
10446175
Figure 4-10. Wall-mounted dry-type distribution transformers at the
Kettleman Compressor Station in Coalinga (upper photograph) and at the
IBM/Santa Teresa Facility in Morgan Hill (lower photograph).
4-19
10446175
Figure 4-11. Oil-cooled transformers at the Rapel Hydroelectric Plant
(upper photograph) and at Las Condes Hospital (lower photograph); both
facilities are located in the near-field of the 1985 Chile Earthquake.
4-20
10446175
Figure 4-12. At Adak Naval Station, two unanchored dry-type transformers
slid about 1/2 inch. The units were not damaged.
4-21
10446175
Figure 4-13. At the California Federal Bank Computer Facility, which
experienced an estimated PGA in excess of 0.40g during the 1987 Whittier
Earthquake, two distribution transformers were damaged. The structural
tubing support system shown in the photograph is a post-earthquake
modification.
4-22
10446175
* At the Mail Oil Pl.mping Plant. inadequate anchorage alowed a
transformer to side several inches cutting ilsuation . The unit
developed a short circUt several months later .
15
** At the SICARTSA Steel Mill, lnadEqla.tely Installed insulation it
caused an internal short circuit.
I CJ)
cCll
c *** At the Cal Fed and Sanwa Bark Facilfiies, the core support inside three
~ transformers deformed sufficiently to short out 111its . 0:::
....
Q) l!:!li,!il:Uindcates : :maged 111it.
c:
Q)
E
0==
0..
'«;
c:::
>. ....Q)
~
='1-
~ c::: o ..
~ 10 +-'
en :0 ~
0
c:::2
·- Cll
w
:::!:
c:::
.Q (ij 0 Ci5 ~s:
a:
0
'«;
Ci5 z
>
Cll
~
CJ)
.~
.0
E
:::c::I
cCll t
.........
Q) c:::
Cll
aa
-a: c
11. "'i"i; c:::JS
(/) .... :o:-
> a..
Q) ......
z 0
CJ) c::: u.
E c~ § m ~
c::: Ot'll
'Eo
ct CJ) Cll ;:) () >.
a: Q) Cll 0 .Q 0.. ....0
1- 2 o.. ,_ E
~ ~ ·~
Q.
~
Ol
~
11. E G>O..Cil§ c::: .g 0
.~li>a::()I
I
C/)
c.... - t/·· · · -£>-
N 0 0 Cll
w a:
w
0 .
o..:;:: .... s o§>.O
Q) · - C/) CJ)
E
::I
u..
c::: .~ ~
~Cll~O..
~ ~ ~ ~
5 (i) '«; 0..
~ __
al
lii!I f
Cll ..c:
:::!: E C/)
::> Q)
O..G>
z ~ ~ a5 ~ ~ ~
Cll
~ >a:{g m.....l ~
CJ)
Cll
a5 € 2
~ ·-
.....J (5 I\;':'' ft
CJ)
Q)
~ 0:::
0
0.20g 0.30g 0.40g 0.50g 0.60g
IN· TRANS 40010.04 SQUG·20 CLASSES
Figure 4-14. Selected inventory of transformers within the seismic experience data base as a
function of ground motion. All instances resulting in a loss of function are indicated.
10446175
10446175
Section 5
HORIZONTAL PUMPS
The equipment class of horizontal pumps includes all pumps commonly found in
power plant applications which have their axes aligned horizontally. The class
includes pumps driven by electric motors, engines, and turbines, including common
peripheral components such as conduit, instrumentation, and suction and discharge
lines.
5.1 DEFINITION OF EQUIPMENT C~ASS
Pumps can generally be categorized as either kinetic (rotary impeller) or

positive displacement types. Kinetic pumps move fluid using the kinetic energy
of a rotating impeller. Fluid is forced either in the radial direction by
centrifugal force, or in the axial direction by propeller force. Positive
displacement pumps move fluid by a volumetric displacement of a reciprocating
piston, a rotating screw, gears, or vanes. Each category of pump is discussed in
the fo 11 owing paragraphs.
Kinetic {Rotary Impeller) Pumps

Kinetic pumps, commonly used in power plants, can be categorized as either
single-stage or multi-stage pumps.
Single-stage pumps are used in applications that require a high fluid flow rate
at a relatively low differential pressure. They typically include a single
impeller that moves fluid primarily by centrifugal force. The suction port is
normally mounted along or near the impeller axis, and the discharge port is
mounted near the periphery. Single- stage pumps are the most common type of pump
found in power plant and industrial facility applications. The pumps range in
size from fractional horsepower units, with capacities of a few gallons per
minute (gpm}, to units requiring several hundred horsepower, with capacities in
excess of 100,000 gpm. The largest single-stage pumps in power plants are
usually the circulating water pumps, which supply raw cooling water to the main
5-1
10446175
condensers. The pressure differential between suction and discharge for a
single-stage pump seldom exceeds 100 psi. Figure 5-1 shows a cross-sectional
view of a typical single-stage centrifugal pump (excluding the drive motor).
Examples from data base sites are shown in Figures 5-8 and 5-9.
Multi-stage pumps are used in applications that require a high differential

pressure, but a relatively moderate flow rate. Multi-stage pumps, also called
turbine pumps, include two or more impellers working in series on a single shaft.
Depending on the impeller design, multi-stage pumps move fluid usirig either
centrifugal force toward the periphery of the impeller, or propeller force along
the axis of the impeller. Most impellers are shaped to include a combination of
both axial and radial flow. The impeller is surrounded by a stationary casing or
volute that directs the flow from the discharge of one impeller to the intake of
the next. The most common application of multi-stage pumps in power plants is
the injection of feedwater into a boiler or steam generator. This typically
requires pressure differentials of up to 2,000 psi with flow rates on the order
of 1,000 gpm. Figure 5-2 shows a cross-sectional view of a typical multi-stage
turbine pump. An example from the data base is shown in Figure 5-5.
Kinetic pumps are usually powered by electric motors with the pump and motor
sharing the same shaft through a close-coupled connection. Larger multi-stage
pumps sometimes couple the motor and pump through a gearbox, which allows the
pump and motor to turn at different speeds. Single-stage pumps are occasionally
belt-driven, with the motor mounted to the side, or even atop the pump casing.
An example of belt-driven pumps is shown in Figure 5-7.
Smaller, single-stage pumps sometimes mount the motor and impeller within the
same casing. Larger pumps, both single- and multi-stage, normally have the motor
and pump in separate casings, with both casings anchored to the same steel skid.
Engine or steam turbine drives are used in applications where the pump must be
available in the event of loss of electric power. An example of an engine-driven
single-stage, centrifugal pump is shown in Figure 5-6 (upper photograph). Steam
turbine-driven, multi-stage pumps are common in power plants where a supply of
feedwater to the boiler is critical in the event of a station blackout. An
example is shown in Figure 5-6 (lower photograph).
10446175
5-2
Positive Displacement Pumps
Positive displacement pumps are used in applications requiring high differential
pressures. The two types occasionally found in power plant applications are
reciprocating-piston pumps and rotary screw pumps.
Reciprocating-piston pumps are similar in design to reciprocating-piston air

compressors. They include an electric motor that powers a set of piston
impellers through a shaft or belt connection. The piston. impellers are usually
mounted within a cast block that also contains the piston crank shaft and valve
mechanism. Figure 5-3 is a cross section of a typical piston pump. An example
of a reciprocating-piston pump from the data base is shown in Figure 5-6 (lower
photograph).
Rotary-screw pumps are somewhat similar to multi-stage turbine pumps, except that
the screw impeller moves fluid .axially through volume displacement rather than
through a transfer of kinetic energy from the impeller to the fluid. The screw
impeller is normally powered by an electric motor through a close-coupled shaft.
Anchorage
The pump casing and drive motor are typically bolted to a common steel base skid.
The base skid is in turn anchored to a raised concrete pad by cast-in-place bolts
routed through bolt holes in the bottom channel of the skid.
In nuclear plants, multi-stage turbine pumps are typically used for critical
functions such as auxiliary feedwater, borated water, and high pressure coolant
injection. Single-stage centrifugal pumps are used for functions such as
circulating component cooling water or supplying diesel fuel to engine generators
or lube oil to large pumps. Positive displacement pumps are often used in BWRs
for pressurizing control rod drive systems. Examples of nuclear plant pumps are
presented in Figure 5-4.
5.2 DATA BASE REPRESENTATION FOR HORIZONTAL PUMPS

Figures 5-5 through 5-13 present examples of horizontal pumps within the data
base. The data base inventory of horizontal pumps includes about 280 examples,
representing 35 sites and 12 of the earthquakes studied in compiling the data
5-3
10446175
base. Of this inventory, there are four sites that experienced seismic damage to
horizontal pumps that affected functionality.
Figure 5-14 presents a bar chart that illustrates the inventory of horizontal
pumps at various data base sites as a function of their estimated PGA.
horizontal pumps are summarized below.
Kinetic and positive displacement horizontal pumps driven by electric motors,

engines, and turbines are represented in the range from 5 to 2,300 hp and 45 to
36,000 gpm. Most horizontal pumps and motors are mounted on a common steel skid;
however, there are also examples of separately mounted pumps and motors.
• Pump
• Driver
• Attached instrumentation and controls
• Attached piping (suction and discharge lines) and conduit to the
nearest anchor point.

mile of the plant.
Horizontal pumps are used in various applications in the plant. Each unit, for
example, includes three high pressure, multi-stage turbine feedwater pumps, as
shown in Figure 5-5. The upper photograph of the figure shows the motor-driven
feedwater pumps for Unit 2. The lower photograph shows the steam turbine-driven
emergency feedwater pump for Unit 1. The plant also includes a variety of
single-stage centrifugal pumps of various sizes, including two 450 horsepower
circulating water pumps mounted in concrete-lined pits adjacent to the cooling
towers. All pumps were operational following the earthquake.
5-4
10446175
recorded at the Pleasant Valley Plant much further from the fault.
The plant includes two diesel-driven centrifugal pumps that supply water to the
cooling tower (Figure 5-6, upper photograph). The pumps are single-stage
centrifugal units close-coupled to diesel engines. The pump and motor are bolted
to a common concrete pedestal.
The plant also includes several examples of steam-powered reciprocating piston

pumps, as shown in Figure 5-6 (lower photograph). The pumps were part of the
original facility constructed in the late 1940s. They are powered by small, two-
cylinder, piston steam engines which have a direct rod connection to the pump
pistons. The steam engine and pump are bolted to a common steel base plate.
All pumps at the Union Oil Plant were undamaged by the sequence of Coalinga
earthquakes.
site.
The plant includes three large, motor-driven, single-stage centrifugal pumps

located in the yard, one of which is shown in Figure 5-7 (upper photograph). The
pump and motor have close-coupled shaft drives, and are mounted to a common steel
skid, which is bolted to a concrete pad. A minor amount of spalling was noted in
the concrete at the point of contact with the bas~ of the skid, apparently caused
by the inertial loads exerted by the pump skid during the earthquake.
The Main Oil Plant is the Coalinga terminal for the pipeline that transports
crude oil to the refineries in the San Francisco Bay Area. The oil is injected
into the pipeline by two large, gas-turbine powered, single-stage centrifugal
pumps. These pumps were undamaged by the sequence of earthquakes and remained
operational, although the concrete pedestals supporting the turbine-pumps settled
and shifted slightly.
5-5
10446175
estimated at 0.60g and the Pleasant Valley ground motion spectrum is applicable
here.
Details were collected for eight of the horizontal pumps at the plant. Figure 5-
7 {lower photograph) shows one of several single-stage centrifugal pumps, motor-
driven through a belt linkage. As seen in the photograph, the motor is mounted
atop a steel frame that encloses the pump drive shaft and supports the impeller
casing at one end. All components are bolted to a steel base plate which is
anchored to a concrete pad with cast-in-place bolts.
The plant also contains several single-stage centrifugal pumps, and several
positive displacement screw type pumps with direct shaft drives rather than belt
linkages.
All pumps in the plant are of medium size with drive motors of about 100
horsepower. All pumps were operational through the sequence of earthquakes.

The experience data base contains seven sites that experienced seismic effects to
horizontal pumps. At four sites, the damage resulted in a lo$S of function of
the pumps.
At the Mirassou Winery, affected by the 1984 Morgan Hill Earthquake, a single-
stage centrifugal pump suffered an oil leak at a flanged connection between the
impeller casing and an attached gearbox. The pump is shown in Figure 5-10. The
pump is mounted on a large steel frame in the equipment yard of the winery
(Figure 5-10, upper photograph), which supports a glycol refrigeration system.
The design of this particular pump is not typical of pumps found in power plant
applications. As shown in the lower photograph of Figure 5-10, the impeller
casing supports a large motor/gearbox cantilevered from a flanged connection.
The oil leak that occurred at the flanged connection was apparently caused by the
inertial loads of the motor gearbox.
At the SICARTSA Steel Mill, affected by the 1985 Mexico Earthquake, vibration
problems were reported in several large, steam-turbine powered horizontal
centrifugal pumps (Figure 5-11, upper photograph). The pump casings are attached
5-6
10446175
through flanged connections to short runs of 30-inch piping. The 30-inch
discharge line is routed about 10 feet from the pump into the concrete water
storage basin, which is adjacent to the pump house. The pump casings are
therefore rigidly connected to a structure that is independent of their
foundation. This rigid piping connection makes the pump susceptible to loading,
due to even minor differential displacements between the pump house and the
adjacent water storage basin. During the earthquake, differential displacement
most likely imposed excessive loads on the pump casings, either wearing the
bearings or creating misalignments in the pump/turbine shaft. Apparently, the
vibration did not affect the operability of the pumps.
At the Fertimex Fertilizer Plant, which was affected by the 1985 Mexico
Earthquake, about 20 horizontal pumps were damaged by differential displacement
caused by ground settlement (in some locations, as much as 12 inches). Ground
settlement beneath the concrete mats supporting the array of pumps (10 hp and 125
hp) lowered the pumps several inches. The attached inlet and discharge lines
connect to a raw water storage basin on one side of the pumps, and to filtration
tanks on the other side. The foundations of these structures did not settle as
much as the pumps. Several inches of vertical differential displacement were
therefore imposed on the piping attached to the pumps (Figure 5-11, lower
photograph). This differential displacement imposed severe moments on the
casings of the smaller pumps. On several pumps, the imposed moment was
sufficient to break the flanged connection in the motor/pump drive shaft.
At the Caxton Paper Mill, which experienced an estimated PGA of 0.40g during the
1987 New Zealand Earthquake, a horizontal pump sustained a cracked casing. The
pump is located outside of the water treatment plant adjacent to the paper mill,
where ground slumping and settlement caused damage to its foundation and casing
(Figure 5-12).
At the Sanwa Bank Computer Facility, one of four small, chilled water pumps
(approximately 10 hp) sustained a cracked casing during the 1987 Whittier
Earthquake (Figure 5-13). The damage was apparently caused by excessive inertial
loads on the pump from the piping attachments. The attached piping was poorly
supported (on spring hangers) with poor ceiling connections, and at least two
pipe supports fell as a result of the earthquake. A secondary source of the
damage appeared to be seismic anchor movement. A chiller that was rigidly
connected to the pump moved six inches during the earthquake.
5-7
10446175
At the Ticor Data Processing Facility, which experienced an estimated PGA of
0.40g during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake, horizontal pumps in the penthouse were
dislodged from their vibration isolation mounts. The pumps appeared to be
functional, in spite of the anchorage damage.
At the nearby California Federal Bank Computer Facility, which also experienced
an estimated PGA of 0.40g during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake, horizontal pumps
mounted on vibration isolators with seismic stops showed evidence of movement.
Some of the bolts anchoring the seismic stops showed evidence of minor prying;
however, the pumps continued to operate.
The data base contains no evidence of seismically induced malfunctions of

horizontal pumps (inadvertent starting or stopping).
Instances of seismically induced damage to horizontal pumps are known to have

occurred at sites reviewed in an extensive literature search/telephone survey.
These sites are not included in the data base, and few details about the
incidents are known. The most important examples are discussed below.
At the Kern Steam Plant, affected by the 1952 Kern County Earthquake, one boiler
feed pump suffered a loss of suction. According to the plant's trouble report,
"The No. 4 secondary boiler feed pump flashed (1 ost suction) and froze . . . the
internal assembly will have to be replaced." According to discussions (in 1987)
with the plant engineer and an instrumentation technician who was at the plant
during the earthquake, the boiler feed pumps are mounted on the same header.
Therefore, it is unlikely that one pump would lose suction without all of the
boiler feed pumps suffering similar damage. The unit is an Ingersoll-Rand pump
powered by a 2,000 hp General Electric motor. No further information is
available.
Seismic damage to horizontal pumps from inadequate anchorage and/or other anchor
point displacement has occurred at several sites, including those affected by the
1964 Niigata Earthquake, the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake (including Olive View
Hospital, HVAC Plant), the 1972 Managua Earthquake (including ENALUF Power
Plant), the 1976 Tangshan Earthquake, and the 1978 Santa Barbara Earthquake
(including several buildings at UCSB).
5-8
10446175
The seismic experience data base indicates that horizontal pumps possess
for horizontal pumps:
• Isolation Mounts. Horizontal pumps supported on isolation mounts,

not specifically designed to accommodate the lateral forces of an
earthquake, have dislodged at several data base sites.
• Attached Piping. Anchor point displacements of attached piping
have imposed excessive loads on horizontal pumps and has led to
pump damage at several data base sites.
5.5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Engineers. 8th Ed. McGraw-Hill.
2. Johnston Pump Company. n.d. "Johnston Engineering Data."
3. McGraw-Edison Compariy, Worthington Pump Division. n.d. "Pump Selector for
Industry."
4. Transamerica Delaval Inc. n.d. "Boiler Feedwater Pumps and Their Turbine
Drivers for Generating Stations."
5. United Centrifugal Pumps. n.d. "United TC Series Process Pumps."
6. Patterson Pump Company. n.d. Catalog G-80.
7. Morris Pumps, Inc. n.d. "Type AF Axial Flow Pumps."
8. Buffalo Forge Corporation. n.d. "Buffalo Can-0-Matic." Bulletin
979-B.
9. General Signal. n.d. "Aurora Pump."
10. O'Keefe, W. June 1972. "Pumps." Power 116.
11. Miller and Felszeghy. December 1978. "Engineering Features of the Santa
Barbara Earthquake of August 13, 1978." UCSB-ME-78-2.
5-9
10446175
Discharge Gage Tapping
(on side opposite)
Rear Bearing
Impeller (Enclosed)
Shaft
~··
Motor Bracket Assembly
Bearing Bracket Assembly

Suction Gage Tapping
1W'A, 2"A and 2W'F

construction details
Courtesy Bell & Gossett ITT
Figure 5-l. Components of a single-stage centrifugal pump.
5-10
10446175
Stuffing
IJOK
Courtesy Power Magazine, June 1972
Figure 5-2. Cross section of a six-stage turbine pump (motor not shown).
5-11
10446175
Courtesy National Supply Company
Figure 5-3. A typical reciprocating-piston pump (motor not shown).
5-12
10446175
Figure 5-4. Horizontal single-impeller centrifugal pump (upper
photograph) and turbine pump (lower photograph) in nuclear plant
applications.
10446175 5-13
The Unit 2 multi-stage turbine feedwater pumps are driven by 600 hp Allis
Chalmers induction motors. The differential pressure across the pump is
approximately 1600 psi. The pump and motor are bolted to a common steel
skid, which is anchored to a concrete pad with six 1-1/4-inch embedded
bolts.
Unit 1 includes a steam turbine emergency feedwater pump.

The turbine and pump are mounted to a common steel skid anchored
to a concrete pad with eight l-inch embedded bolts.
Figure 5-5. Horizontal pumps at El Centro Steam Plant.
10446175 5-14
The plant cooling tower is served by two diesel engine-driven, single-
stage centrifugal pumps. The pumps are part of the original facility
constructed in the late 1940s.
The plant includes several reciprocating-piston pumps driven by two-

cylinder steam engines. These pumps are part of the original facility
constructed in the late 1940s.
Figure 5-6. Horizontal pumps at the Union Oil Butane Plant.
10446175
5-15
One of three centrifugal pumps at the Main Oil Pumping Plant. The Bingham
pump and 400 hp (est.) motor are attached to a common steel skid that is
anchored to a concrete pad with six 1/2-inch bolts.
One of three belt-driven,

single-stage centrifugal pumps
at the Shell Water Treatment
Plant. The motor and impeller
casing are bolted to a steel
frame that is bolted to a base
plate anchored into the
concrete pad with four 1/2-inch
cast-in-place bolts.
Figure 5-7. Horizontal pumps in the near-field of the 1983 Coalinga

Earthquake.
5-16
10446175
Figure 5-8. Horizontal, single-stage, centrifugal pumps at the Valley
Steam Plant (upper photograph) and the Glendale Power Plant (lower
photograph) in the San Fernando Valley.
5-17
10446175
One of several single-stage centrifugal pumps at the Llolleo Pumping
Plant.
Single-stage centrifugal pumps at the Concon Water Treatment Plant.
Figure 5-9. Horizontal pumps at sites affected by the 1985 Chile

Earthquake.
10446175
5-18
The glycol coolant pump is
mounted on the second
level of a flexible steel-
frame structure supporting
a refrigeration system
that chills coolant for
wine storage tanks.
An oil leak occurred at the

flanged connection of the motor-
gearbox with the impeller
casing.
Figure 5-10. The Mirassou Winery, affected by the 1984 Morgan Hill
Earthquake, reported minor damage to a pump included in its refrigerant
chilling system.
5-19
10446175
At the SICARTSA Steel Mill, differential displacement between the pump
house and the adjacent water storage basin caused vibration problems in
large steam-turbine powered horizontal centrifugal pumps.
At the Fertimex Fertilizer Plant, about 20 horizontal pumps were damaged

by differential displacement caused by excessive ground settlement. Note
the added shim under the stanchions to the right. The pump settled
several inches with respect to the structure to the right supporting the
pipe.
Figure 5-11. Damage to horizontal pumps suffered as a result of the 1985

Mexico Earthquake.
5-20
10446175
Figure 5-12. The Caxton Paper Mill experienced a great deal of ground
slumping and settlement during the 1987 New Zealand Earthquake; estimated
PGA = 0.40g. At the water treatment plant, soil slumping damaged the
foundation, causing the casing of this horizontal pump to crack. The
pump, foundation, and lighter soil in the foreground of the upper
photograph represent the post-earthquake repairs.
5-21
10446175
~
~
Figure 5-13. At the Sanwa Bank Computer Center, one of four chilled water
pumps suffered a cracked casing during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake. The
damage was apparently caused in part by the failure of attached piping
supports (upper photograph). During the earthquake, at least two of the
pipe supports broke, adding additional loads to the pump.
5-22
10446175
* At th9 f.t"assou W'n«y, a sngle-stage centr1fugal punp SI.Jtfe<ed an ol leek at
a flanged comectlon between the lrrpeler casng and an attached gearbox.
** At th9 Fertinex Fertiizer Plant 20 horizontal pun-ps were damaged by

dffe<entlal dsplacement caused by groood settlement.
*** At the Caxton Paper Mil, a llilgle-etage centrifugal punp euflered a brd<en
casing whoo Is concrete fOllldallon siunl>ed dowrtil towards the rtver.
****At the Sanwa Barl< Compute< Facllty, a horizontal punp 8U8taloed • «acked
casng rue to dtfe<entlal motion of the punp attachments .
..."' [El lndcatoa a damaged uri! .
30
-a
0:
c
£
a;
~ J;!
>.
~
0
a.. iLL ;s;
·o
Ill
(/) 2Ill
LL I' i':':''j C
a.
:: I Ci5 - t al
::J ... 0:
a. 20
.J
.. "'
~
alE
<C c
Cl)
Cl) 0 . . ({)....
U)
Ql
Ql
1-
z 0 al i 0
(J1
0
N Cl)~'ts~ ~
.._ LL cal
N
w
I
a:
0
8.ial
E <11_ ~;>- 0:
01
i5 J: w ·-
HI~ H
J:
u.
0
ffi 10
IXl
::::J
z
~ g
~
0
0.20g 0.30g 0.40g 0.50g 0.60g
IN·HP 40010 04 SQUQ·20 CLASSES PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION (AVERAGE HORIZONTAL)
Figure 5-14. Selected inventory of horizontal pumps within the seismic experience data base as
a function of ground motion. All instances resulting in loss of function are indicated.
10446175
10446175
Section 6
VERTICAL PUMPS
This equipment class is defined as pumps with their impeller drive shaft mounted
in a vertical (as opposed to horizontal} direction. The equipment class includes
·the pump, its drive motor, and typical attachments such as piping, conduit, and
instrumentation or controls mounted to the pump.

Vertical pumps normally consist of an electric drive motor, vertically aligned
and mounted atop a steel or cast-iron support frame that is anchored to a
concrete base pad.
There are two general types of vertical pumps normally found in power plant
applications:
• Deep well pumps

• Single-stage centrifugal pumps
Deep Well Pumps

Most vertical pumps used in power plants are the deep-well turbine type, where
the pump impeller is attached to the bottom of a long vertical drive shaft
extending beneath the pump base plate. The basic components of a typical deep-
well turbine pump are shown in Figure 6-1. The pump drive shaft is enclosed in a
steel or cast-iron casing which extends below the pump base plate. The pump
impeller is mounted in a contoured housing or bowl at the base of the casing.
The number of impeller/bowl units or volutes mounted at the base of the pump
depends on the required discharge pressure of the pump. The casing or suction
pipe is immersed in a well and opened at the bottom for fluid inlet. Examples of
deep well turbine pumps at typical data base sites are shown in Figures 6-6
(upper photograph}, 6-7 (lower photograph}, and 6-11.
6-1
10446175
A variation of the deep-well turbine pump is the can type of pump, illustrated in
Figure 6-2. The casing that encloses the impeller drive shaft is in turn
enclosed by an outer casing or can. Fluid feed to the pump flows through an
inlet line, usually mounted in the support frame above the pump base plate. The
can forms an annular reservoir of fluid that is drawn into the impeller at the
base of the inner casing. Examples of this type of pump at data base sites are
shown in Figures 6-5 (lower photograph) and 6-6 (lower photograph).
Vertical pumps range in size from fractional horsepower units to pumps of several
thousand horsepower. Pump capacities typically range up to 30,000 gallons per
minute of flow, with discharge pressures of up to 3,000 feet of head (about 1,200
psi). Large vertical pumps typically have a height of about 10 feet from their
base plate to the top of the motor. The casings, cantilevered below the base
plate, have typical lengths of 10 to 20 feet. The most massive component of the
pump is normally the drive motor, which may weigh several tons on larger units.
Single Stage Centrifugal Pumps

Single-stage centrifugal pumps are configured with the impeller mounted above the
base plate, directly beneath the drive motor as illustrated in Figure 6-3. The
impeller is housed in a casing that is usually part of the support frame for the
drive motor. Instead of drawing fluid from a well or can beneath the pump base
plate, the flu~d inlet is a piping attachment aligned with a centerline of the
impeller drive shaft. The discharge line is tangential to the periphery of the
centrifugal impeller casing.
Smaller centrifugal pumps are sometimes mounted directly on the piping system
they serve, rather than anchored to a concrete pad. Examples are shown in
Figures 6-8 and 6-9.
Equipment Anchorage
Vertical pumps are normally anchored by a minimum of four bolts cast into the
concrete pad supporting the pump and routed through bolt holes in the base plate
of the pump. The primary connections within the pump structure, such as the
attachment of the motor to the support frame, typically use a bolted flange.
6-2
10446175
Vertical pumps in power plants are typically the can or wet-pit type of deep-well
pump. They range in size from fractional horsepower units, used for lube oil
mixing or fuel oil transfer, to units requiring thousands of horsepower, such as
the circulating water pumps for main condensers. Other common power plant
applications are condensate transfer pumps, service water pumps, and component
cooling water pumps.
Applications in Nuclear Plants

Common nuclear plant applications of vertical pumps in safe shutdown systems
include service water pumps, residual heat removal pumps, core spray, and high
pressure coolant injection pumps. Examples of nuclear plant vertical pumps are
presented in Figure 6-4.
6.2 DATA BASE REPRESENTATION FOR VERTICAL PUMPS

Figures 6-5 through 6-13 present examples of vertical pumps within the data base.
The data base inventory of vertical pumps includes about 220 examples,
base. Of this inventory, there are two sites that experienced seismic damage to
vertical pumps.
Figure 6-14 presents a bar chart that illustrates the inventory of vertical pumps
vertical pumps are summarized below.
Vertical deep-well and can type pumps are represented with motors ranging from 5
hp to 7,000 hp and flow rates ranging from 95 to 16,000 gpm. Shaft lengths of
deep well or can pumps vary from 6 to 20 feet; motor height ranges from 3 to 11
feet.
• Pump
• Drive motor
6-3
10446175
• Associated instrumentation, and controls attached to the pump
• Attached piping and conduit to the nearest building anchor point

The plant includes several vertical pumps in various power plant applications.
Typical vertical pumps include the fuel oil pump serving Unit 4 (Figure 6-5,
lower photograph), a can-type pump with a 20 hp (est.) motor manufactured by
United Centrifugal Pump Co. Other examples include oil circulation pumps located
atop the lube oil tank (Figure 6-5, upper photograph). All vertical pumps were
ground motion record of 0.56g (average of horizontal components) at the Pleasant
Valley Plant taken much further from the fault. The duration of strong motion at
the site was estimated to be 15 seconds.
The plant contains four large, vertical turbine pumps. There are two Byron
Jackson can-type pumps with 500 hp Siemens-Allis induction motors (Figure 6-6,
lower photograph), and two can-type pumps with 300 hp Westinghouse Lifeline
induction motors. The impeller shaft lengths could not be determined, but each
pump has an above ground height of about 8 feet. All vertical pumps were
Pumping Plant in the direction of the epicenter of the 1983 Coalinga Earthquake.
recorded at the Pleasant Valley Plant is also applicable here.
The plant contains four vertical, deep-well turbine pumps. They are Veriline
turbine pumps with 700 hp U.S. Electric motors (Figure 6-6, upper photograph).
6-4
10446175
These pumps have a shaft length of 20 feet and a height of 10 feet from the base
plate. Anchorage consists of four 1/2-inch bolts. All vertical pumps were

vertical pumps.
At the San Juan de Llolleo Pumping Station, affected by the 1985 Chile
Earthquake, the steel casing (enclosing the impeller drive shaft) cracked on one
of three high pressure vertical pumps. The casing length is approximately 23
feet. The casing was corroded and the crack occurred next to an old weld repair
of an earlier crack. Approximately 1/2 mile from the San Juan de Llolleo plant,
two of six deep-well vertical pumps and their casings were damaged and had to be
replaced due to ground settlement. The wells these pumps serve are approximately
160 feet deep.
At irrigation pumping stations along the California Aqueduct, three large

vertical deep-well pumps showed excessive vibration due to bearing wear, or
leaking shaft packings over a period of weeks during the 1983 sequence of
Coalinga earthquakes. Maintenance personnel voiced the opinion that the wear may
have resulted from the repeated loads placed on the pumps by the earthquakes.
The vibration and minor leakage from the pumps was detected and corrected as part
of regular maintenance activities. The pumps remained in operation during the
sequence of the earthquakes.
At the ANDA Pumping Stations, affected by the 1986 San Salvador Earthquake, a
deep-well pump operated for four hours after power was restored and then stopped.
Two other pumps suffered from higher than normal levels of vibration following
the earthquake. It is possible that minor building/ground settlement may have
caused pump shaft misalignments, which led to the vibration and damage.
At the Mesquite Lake Resource Recovery Plant, several vertical pumps stopped
during the 1987 Superstition Hills Earthquake (Figure 6-13). The site
experienced an average horizontal PGA of 0.30g during the earthquake. Two
possible explanations, give by the plant operators, were that seismically induced
flexure resulted in a temporary binding of the shaft, or that vibration sensors
6-5
10446175
in the electric motors tripped the pumps. Following the earthquake, the pumps
were turned by hand and then started. There was no permanent damage to the
pumps.
Instances of seismically induced damage to vertical pumps are known to have

These sites are not included in the data base, and few details about the
incidents are known. The most important examples are discussed below.
Seismic damage to vertical pumps from ground settlement has occurred at several
sites, including those affected by the 1952 Kern County Earthquake (including
Wheeler Ridge Field), the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake (including Olive View
Hospital and the booster pumps in city owned wells), and the 1972 Managua
Earthquake (including Asososca Lagoon Pumping Station where fallen earth from
landslides blocked the pump suction).

The seismic experience data base indicates that vertical pumps possess
exception of deep-well pumps affected by ground settlement, the experience data
base includes no instances of seismic damage to vertical pumps.
6.5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Engineers. 8th Ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
2. Johnston Pump Company. n.d. "Johnston Engineering Data."
3. Johnston Pump Company. n.d. "Johnston Deep-Well Turbine Pumps."
4. Worthington Pump. n.d. Pump Selector for Industry.
New York, NY: McGraw-Edison.
5. Byron Jackson Pump Division. n.d. "Vertical Turbine Pumps."
6. Peabody Floway. n.d. "Vertical Pumps."
7. Peerless Pump. n.d. "Vertical Lineshaft Turbine Pumps."
6-6
10446175
Surface discharge head
with streamlined discharge
ell, large frame openings
for easy accessibility. Base
Gland --------------.. of head designed to meet
sanitary well requirements,
Stuffing box with grease seal and lifting lugs cast
integrally with head
Packing ---·-·----------~
Stuffing box bushing
Pre-lubrication connection
Drainport
Line shaft coupling - ··
Top column pipe
Column pipe coupling
Line shaft sleeve - no

undercutting of shaft. No
Column pipe ---. --·· --. ········---··------=
reduction of shaft diarneter.
maintaining full-shaft
strength and horsepower-
carrying capacity
Discharge bowl bearings UHF impeller enclosed type

assures maximum sustained
performance with minimum
thrust
Flanged type bowls ---·
Intermediate bowl
---·-·- ·- ---·- Sand collar
·----- Extra-long sealed bearing

Suction case grease-packed
··-----Suction pipe
Cone type strainer
Courtesy McGraw-Edison Company

Worthington Pump Divis~on
Figure 6-1. Components of vertical deep-well turbine pump.
6-7
10446175
't
steel spacer
coupling
cast iron stuffing
box gland
cast-iron stuffing
box
bronze stuffing
box b e a r i n g - - - - - - - - - <
steel top
column pipe
stainless steel top
shaft
rubber encapsulated
compound flange
steel lineshaft
coupling
stainless steel
impeller shaft
steel impeller
collet
cast-iron
intermediate bowt
steel
tank
bronze suction
bell bearing
Courtesy McGraw-Edison Company

Worthington Pump Division
Figure 6-2. Components of a vertical can-type pump.
6-8
10446175
Slinger
Shaft Sleeve
Bracket Cover Platr:

Seal Assc;mbly
Volute Caf) Screw
Gauge TPJppnlq
h1pci1Cr lOCk Nut
Vol~,\·-,
Courtesy Bell & Gossett ITT
Figure 6-3. Components of a vertical single-stage centrifugal pump

supported on the piping system it serves.
6-9
10446175
Figure 6-4. Vertical pumps in nuclear plant applications.
6-10
10446175
Oil circulation pumps located atop the lube oil tank.
The fuel oil pump serving Unit 4 is a can-type pump manufactured

by the United Centrifugal Pump Co. with a 40 hp Continental Electric
motor.
Figure 6-5. Vertical pumps at El Centro Steam Plant affected by
the 1979 Imperial Valley Earthquake.
6-11
10446175
These vertical, deep-well turbine booster pumps at the Coalinga Water
Treatment Plant include a U.S. Electric 700 hp motor and a Veriline
turbine pump wi~h a column length of 20 feet.
The Main Oil Pumping Plant has -/

two can-type, Byron-Jackson
pumps with Siemens-Allis 500 hp
motors. Anchorage consists of
four l-inch anchor bolts.
Figure 6-6. Vertical pumps at near-field sites affected by the 1983

Coalinga swarm of earthquakes.
6-12
10446175
The Pleasant Valley Pumping
Plant includes nine large
centrifugal pumps for lifting
water between sections of the
California Aqueduct. One of
the centrifugal impellers is
shown here. The drive motors,
which range from 1200 to
7000 hp, are mounted on the
operating floor above.
The San Luis Canal pumping stations, east of the Pleasant Valley Plant,
include about 100 large vertical pumps located within the strong motion
area of the 1983 Coalinga swarm of earthquakes. All are deep-well
turbine pumps ranging in size up to 200 hp. Three pumps located at
different stations developed minor vibration problems during the swarm of
earthquakes.
Figure 6-7. Examples of vertical pumps located along the California

Aqueduct near Coalinga.
6-13
10446175
Figure 6-8. The Union Oil Butane Plant includes several vertical, single-
stage, centrifugal pumps mounted either directly to piping or stanchion-
supported.
6-14
10446175
Figure 6-9. Single-stage centrifugal pumps are supported on rod-hung
piping at the IBM/Santa Teresa Facility. The facility measured an average
horizontal PGA of 0.37g during the 1984 Morgan Hill Earthquake. The pumps
were not damaged.
6-15
10446175
Figure 6-10. Vertical pumps at the Rapel Hydroelectric Plant (upper
photograph) and at the Concon Water Treatment Plant (lower photograph);
both facilities are located in the near-field of the 1985 Chile
Earthquake.
6-16
10446175
Figure 6-11. Three high pressure vertical pumps at the San Juan de
Llolleo Pumping Plant, each with a shaft length of approximately 23 feet.
The steel casing in one of these pumps cracked during the 1985 earthquake.
The crack occurred next to the weld repair of an earlier crack {upper
photograph).
6-17
10446175
Figure 6-12. At the Anda Pumping Stations, which experienced estimated
PGAs of 0.50g during the 1986 San Salvador Earthquake, increased
vibrations were noted in two vertical pumps. A third pump (upper
photograph) operated for four hours once power was restored and then
stopped.
6-18
10446175
••
...
Figure 6-13. At the Mesquite Lake Resource Recovery Plant, several

vertical pumps stopped during the 1987 Superstition Hills Earthquake.
Following the earthquake, the pumps were manually turned and then started.
There was no permanent damage to the pumps.
6-19
10446175
OZ-9
NUMBER OF VERTICAL PUMPS

-+! .,.,
s::: .....
::::ltQ 0
...
0
1\)
0
(,.)
0
(")S::: 0
r+"'S 1\)
0
..... ('!)
0 Ormond Beach Power Plant
::::10'1 CQ
o .....
I Puente Hills Facility
"""'..,..
tQ
Las Ventanas Power Plant. Renca Power Plant
"'S , , , , , , , Concon Facilities
ocn
S:::('l)
::I --'
C. ('I)
(")
3r+
0('1)
Mesquite Lake Facility
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
.....
r+ c.. "C
m
0 ..... )> 0 ,,,,; Glendale Power Plant
.
::I ::::I
<
('!) "
~
(.)
0 '''''' ''''
3
Humboldt Bay Power Plant
)>c+
--'0
::I :II
0
c:
CQ
r. ,.,. ___ j IV Hydroelectric Plant
--'"'5
'< z0 ;::::::::i::::::::::::::::::::::m::i:::::i::·::j Burbark Power Plant
::::10
VI-+! )>
r+ 0 {{:~:;~;:;
!»< 0 ::;:;:i:;.:....
::I ('I)
<"l"'S m
('l)c+ r
(I) ..... m
(") :II
"'S!» )>
IIIII~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
('!) --'
-1
(I)
~
s::: "'C 0 o.
--' s:::
r+3 z
,.... :g Rapel Hydroelectric Plant
llli
..... "'C
I ~
::lVI )>
tQ
........ ~
<
m El Centro Steam Plant *
i
~.
::::lc+
::r
:II
)> ~;!: ~~
--' ..... ~ ~ go§ !~
0::::1 m
(I)
VIc+ :I: : : ~ < ~
0('1)
::r 0
:II
i"
3
~: !:;-
Ill> ~- ::s
"""'
-+,('!)
s::: .....
(I) N
0
0 Distillery
t ~~ ~~
::I (I) z-1 U'l
0 San Salvador Pumping Stations ** ;, ~~~~ . ~
~~~
(")3 CQ
r+ .....
..... (")
)>
r
.......
0
::I ('I)
!» "'C
X
l_t
li l ~l l J!l Jl : ;: j: ; :;: ;: : ~;: : : : il l Jl!J~ ;~ 1~:;J(~ tr ~:::::u~~:~:~ ::~~g Plant
"'S('I)
rD"'S
.... ~A. ~
...Oo('l) -< "'
::I ::::I ~~ :E ~
C..(")
..... ('!) ~!!. ~ l
(")
!»C.. jf t~
r+!»
1,§-
0~----·--·
rDr+ ?-:E
;, Union Oil, Main Oil,
i.e ~l
C..!»
0"
!»
:g Coalinga Water Treatment Plant
"l &
ta ~!.i=
(I)
('!)
!» ~
(I)
& =~
!»
~ I
10446175
Section 7
FLUID-OPERATED VALVES
Remote operated valves allow fluid flow in plant systems to be controlled from a
central control panel. Remote-operated valves are generally categorized as
either actuated by fluid devices (such as diaphragm operated valves), or by
electric devices (such as motors or solenoids). The equipment class of fluid-
operated valves includes valves actuated by air, water, or oil. The equipment
class includes the valve, the operator, and peripheral attachments such as air
lines, pneumatic relays, control solenoids, and conduit.

The data base includes a wide diversity of sizes, types, ages, and applications
of fluid-operated valves. The main types of fluid-operated valves included in
the data base are diaphragm-operated, piston-operated, and pressure relief
valves. Each of these general types is discussed in the sections below.
Diaphragm-operated Pneumatic Valves

The most common type of fluid-operated valve found in power plant applications is
a diaphragm-operated pneumatic valve. The primary components of a diaphragm- -
operated valve are discussed below and illustrated in Figure 7-1. Typical
diaphragm-operated valves in the experience data base are shown in Figures 7-5
and 7-6.
The bell housing contains a diaphragm (usually a thin, steel membrane) which
forms a pressure barrier between the top and bottom sections of the housing.
The position of the actuator rod (or valve stem) is controlled by the
differential pressure across the diaphragm. The actuator rod position, in turn,
controls the position of the valve.
10446175
7-1
A cast-iron or steel yoke supports the bell housing and connects it to the valve
body. The actuator rod is typically threaded through the yoke.
The air pressure on the actuator diaphragm is controlled by a pneumatic relay,

which is often mounted directly to the operator yoke. This relay regulates the
pressure of service air to. the actuator diaphragm and hence, the valve position.
In older plants with pneumatic control systems, the valve control relay receives
its signal from an instrument air system. Power plants with electronic control
systems control pneumatic valve operators through solenoid valves that regulate
the air pressure to the diaphragm.
The valve, which is actuated by a diaphragm-operator, may be of any type, size,

or orientation.
Piston-operated Valves
Piston-operated valves are similar to diaphragm-operated valves, with a piston
replacing the diaphragm as the valve actuator. The primary components of a
piston-operated valve {where they differ from diaphragm-operated valve
components) are discussed below and illustrated in Figure 7-2. Typical piston-
operated valves in the experience data base are shown in Figures 7-7, 7-9, and 7-
10.
The cylinder contains a piston which actuates the valve.
The piston acts in opposition to a spring to control the position of the valve.
Pressure Relief Valves

Pressure relief valves balance confined fluid pressure against the force of a
spring. The actuating force in a pressure relief valve is supplied by the fluid
that is confined by the valve. The primary components of a pressure relief valve
are illustrated in Figure 7-3. Typical pressure relief valves in the experience
data base are shown in Figures 7-11 and 7-12.
Fluid-operators are typically cantilevered either above, or to the side of the

valves they serve. The length from the cantilevered actuator to the valve body
is typically 1 to 4 feet, depending on the size of the valve, with operator
weights ranging up to several hundred pounds. Depending on the manufacturer, the
7-2
10446175
valve and actuator can form a continuous body, or the actuator can be attached to
the valve through a flanged, threaded, or ring clamp connection. The size of the
valve operator depends on the size of the valve and other parameters (i.e., the
pressure of the fluid in the pipe).
Equipment. Anchorage
Anchorage for fluid-operated valves includes the attachments of the actuator to
the yoke and the yoke to the valve. Attachments typically consist of bolted
flange connections, threaded connections, or, occasionally, ring clamps.
Equipment Application
In industrial facilities, conventional power plants, and nuclear plants, fluid-
operated valves are used on piping and duct systems to allow fluid flow in plant
systems to be controlled from a central control panel. Examples of nuclear plant
fluid-operated valves are presented in Figure 7-4.
7.2 DATA BASE REPRESENTATION FOR FLUID-OPERATED VALVES

Figures 7-5 through 7-14 present examples of fluid-operated valves within the
data base. The data base inventory of fluid-operated valves includes about 575
the data base. Of this inventory, there are two sites that experienced
seismically induced damage to fluid-operated valves.
Figure 7-15 presents a bar chart that illustrates the inventory of fluid-operated
valves at various data base sites as a function of their estimated PGA. Figure
7-16 presents the data base inventory of fluid-operated valves as a histogram,
plotting the number of valves as a function of pipe diameter and operator height
above the pipe centerline.
The general bounds of data base representation for the equipment class of fluid-
operated valves are summarized below.
The equipment class of fluid-operated valves includes all valves actuated by a

diaphragm or a piston, as well as spring-loaded pressure relief valves. The
valve, the operator, and peripheral attachments are included in the equipment
class.
7-3
10446175
• Valve
• Operator
• Peripheral attachments (e.g., air lines, pneumatic relays, control
solenoids, conduit)

The Valley Steam Plant experienced a PGA of approximately 0.40g, with strong
motion occurring for about 10 seconds during the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake.
The plant, which includes four units with a total generating capacity of 513 MW,
is located about 10 miles from the epicenter and three miles from the fault.
The plant includes about 150 fluid-operated valves (both diaphragm- and piston-
actuated) of various sizes and locations within the plant (Figure 7-5, upper
photograph). Neither the valves nor their operators were damaged by the
earthquake.
The plant includes about 85 diaphragm-actuated, piston-actuated, and pressure

relief valves of various sizes and locations within the plant (Figures 7-8 and 7-
11, lower photograph). During the earthquake, one diaphragm-operated valve was
damaged due to the repeated impact of its diaphragm housing with an adjacent
steel column (Figure 7-14, upper photograph). A second diaphragm-operated valve
became stuck following the earthquake when rigid tubing attached to the operator
came loose. The rigid 1/4-inch tube did not allow for differential displacement.
There was no permanent damage as a result of this incident.

approximately 0.60g, with strong motion occurring for about 15 seconds during the
1983 Coalinga Earthquake. This PGA is a conservative estimate, based on the
7-4
10446175
The plant includes over 40 fluid-operated valves, both piston- and diaphragm-
actuated (Figure 7-9). Neither the valves nor their operators were damaged in
the earthquake.
the 1983 Coalinga swarm of earthquakes, experienced a PGA of approximately 0.60g.
This PGA is a conservative estimate, based on the nearest ground motion record of
0.56g (an average of the horizontal components) taken much further from the
fault. The duration of strong motion at the site is estimated to be 15 seconds.
The plant includes nine diaphragm-operated valves on 6-inch lines, with an

operator height of 50 inches (Figure 7-6, upper photograph). Neither the valves
nor their operators were damaged in the earthquake.
in the station switchyard as well as in the basement, operating floor, and on the
recorded an average PGA of 0.56g, with about 15 seconds of strong motion.
The plant includes nine large hydraulic piston-operated valves (Figure 7-13,
upper photograph). Neither the valves nor their operators. were damaged in the
earthquake.
estimated at 0.60g, and the ground motion spectrum corresponding to the Union Oil
and Main Oil plants is applicable here.
The plant includes over 50 diaphragm-operated valves (Figure 7-6, lower

photograph). Neither the valves nor their operators were damaged in the
earthquake.

The experience data base contains two sites that experienced seismic effects to
fluid-operated valves.
7-5
10446175
At El Centro Steam Plant, affected by the 1979 Imperial Valley Earthquake, the
cast-iron yoke of a diaphragm-operated valve was cracked, due to the repeated
impact of its diaphragm housing with an adjacent steel column (Figure 7-14, upper
photograph). A second diaphragm-operated valve became stuck following the
earthquake, when rigid tubing attached to the operator came loose. The rigid
1/4-inch tube did not allow for differential displacement. There was no
permanent damage as a result of this incident.
At Las Ventanas Power Plant two diaphragm-operated valves were damaged due to the
impact of their cast-steel yokes with an adjacent handrail approximately 10
inches away (Figure 7-14, lower photograph). On one operator, the connecting
service air line broke, due to insufficient slack to accommodate the displacement
of the operator.
Instances of seismically induced damage to fluid-operated valves are known to

have occurred at sites reviewed in an extensive literature search/telephone
incidents are known. One important example, however, is discussed below.
At Elmendorf Air Force Base Power Plant, affected by the 1964 Anchorage, Alaska
Earthquake, air-operated valves opened automatically on four tanks when an
instrument air line broke. This resulted in the loss of 60,000 gallons of
treated boiler feedwater.

The seismic experience data base indicates that fluid-operated valves possess
exception of interaction effects, the experience data base includes no instances
of seismic damage to fluid-operated valves.
7.5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Fisher Controls. n.d. General Catalog 501.
2. Green, L. January 1986. "Valve Actuators." Specifying Engineer.
3. Quail, B. W. and W. C. Carlos. June 1978. "Solenoid-Operated Valves for

Nuclear Service." Power Engineering.
4. "IEEE Trial-Use Guide for Type Test of Class 1 Electric Valve Operators for
Nuclear Plant Generating Stations." December, 1972. Std. 382-1972.
7-6
10446175
5. "IEEE Standard for Qualification of Safety Related Valve Actuators." 1980.
Std. 382-1972.
6. Masoneilan International, Inc. 1978. Bulletin TD7500E.
7. SquareD Company. 1984. "Evaluating Limit {Position) Switches."
8. Copes-Vulcan. n.d. "CV 600 Control Valve Series." Bulletin 1123-E.
9. MUESCO Controls, Inc. n.d. "Automatic Control Valves, Control Valve
Accessories, Actuators, Continuous Drainers, Level Controls, Controllers
and Transmitters, Process Accessories, Instrument Air Regulators, and
Pneumatic Injection Pumps."
10. Contromatics. n.d. "Valve Actuators."
11. Magnatrol Valve Corp. n.d. "Bronze Solenoid Valves, 2-Way." Catalog 200-
86.
12. Magnatrol Valve Corp. April 4, 1983. "Solenoid Valves."
13. Anderson, Greenwood &Co. July 1981. "AGCO Series 20/30/70, 220/230/270,
320/330/370 Safety-Relief Valves." Catalog 1531.
14. The Foxboro Company. 1985. "Electric Valve Actuators MV-1100 SERIES and
MV-1100/AD-8100 SERIES."
7-7
10446175
....
"1·. ·.
8
l!lf I
Courtesy Fisher Controls
Figure 7-L Typical diaphragm-operated pneumatic valves.
7-8
10446175
.) .
··~
li·a.·
(j-1· . ·.· . I
.l!fi
,... .:
t.l]
Courtesy Fisher Contro1s
Figure 7-2. Typical piston-operated valves.
7-9
10446175
SPRING
SPRING CHAMBER
PASSAGE
SPINDLE
SEAT
GUIDE
INNER CHAMBER
SLOWDOWN
NOZZLE
ADJUSTMENT
EXHAUST HOLE
Courtesy AGCO
L_ ___ j
Figure 7-3. A typical spring-operated pressure relief valve.
7-10
10446175
Figure 7-4. Typical diaphragm-operated (upper photograph) and piston-
operated (lower photograph) valves in nuclear plant applications.
7-11
10446175
Figure 7-5. Diaphragm-operated valves at the Valley Steam Plant (upper
photograph) and the Glendale Power Plant (lower photograph) in the San
Fernando Valley.
7-12
10446175
Figure 7-6. Diaphragm-operated pneumatic valves at the Main Oil Pumping
Plant {upper photograph) and at the Shell Water Treatment Plant {lower
photograph). Both facilities are located in the near-field of the 1983
sequence of earthquakes in Coalinga.
7-13
10446175
Figure 7-7. Piston-operated valves at the Burbank Power Plant (upper
photograph) at the Glendale Power Plant (lower photograph); both
facilities are located in the near-field of the 1971 San Fernando
Earthquake.
7-14
10446175
Figure 7-8. El Centro Steam Plant in the Imperial Valley includes both
diaphragm-operated (upper photograph) and piston-operated (lower
photograph) valves.
7-15
10446175
Figure 7-9. The Union Oil Butane Plant in Coalinga includes examples of
both diaphragm-operated (upper photograph) and piston-operated (lower
photograph) valves. The valves were undamaged by the 1983 Coalinga
Earthquake sequence.
7-16
10446175
Figure 7-10. Piston-operated valves at the IBM/Santa Teresa Facility near
Morgan Hill (upper photograph) and at the Llolleo Pumping Plant in Chile
(lower photograph).
7-17
10446175
Figure 7-11. Pressure relief valves at the Burbank Power Plant in the San
Fernando Valley (upper photograph) and at El Centro Steam Plant in the
Imperial Valley (lower photograph).
7-18
10446175
Figure 7-12. Spring-operated pressure relief valves at the Ormond Beach
Power Plant near Point Mugu (upper photograph) and at the Puente Hills
Landfill Facility, affected by the 1987 Whittier Earthquake (lower
photograph).
7-19
10446175
Figure 7-13. Hydraulic piston-operated valves at the Pleasant Valley
Pumping Plant in Coalinga (upper photograph) and at the Whitewater
Hydroelectric Plant near Palm Springs (lower photograph). The operators
and the associated valves/piping were undamaged in their earthquakes.
7-20
10446175
Figure 7-14. The data base includes two examples of seismic damage to
diaphragm-operated valves caused by interactions with adjacent steel. The
valves are located at El Centro Steam Plant in the Imperial Valley (upper
photograph) and Las Ventanas Power Plant in Chile (lower photograph).
7-21
10446175
~
~
"'>.
~ ~
-3"' ~
~ "0 +>
~
1ii "'
0>
C) -o
~ ~ 0 ClJ
0> {g <D u
"'E
{g "'
~ ci ~CIJ
CIJS-
-.-- ~
"'~"' "':5"' S-
CIJ~
c.. a
~ ><·.--
~ ~ CIJ+l
~ u
0
I
"0 u~
~...:
"5 JUBid Bu!dWnd 1\anB/\ JUBSBald •.--:::::
~~ "'0 E4-
Vl
~-:;; ~ JUBid Bu!dWnd oanoll ·.-- 4-
..
~<a
~ ~ ......
..J
CIJO
Vl
Vl
.. -
1[
"i~ ~ 'E:;:,
C)
0 <l: CIJVl
1- .s::: 0
c::~
E Si "'~
~-e &
1.1)
0
z +> r-
.,0
"'c: 0 ~~
.,.... .,....
<5~ "' "' c:..C:: "'E N
.s:::
o"' !l"' .gj [2 +> C'l
lfi:e
~~ >"'
.,_ "'"' 0
:I:
•.-- ~
~·.--
"'
~~
+>
"' 0
...J~
1ii
0 w Vl r-
0 CIJ::::l
<( -- ::{_!;: :E <l: > Vl
r- ClJ
-IC -1< a: ~S-
-tc w
D C)
>
<l:
.....,
>
Vl
""OCIJ
CIJU
+> ~
0
v 0
z ~~
S-+>
ClJ Vl
ci i= c..~
<l: 0·.--
a: I
-or-
w •.-- r-
..J
w ::::!<(
r-
0 4-
0
SUO!lBlS BU!dWnd !BUBO S!nl UBS <l: 4-~
00
A:J.!I!OB_:j a)fel a:unbsaV\1 c ·.--
z
::J
>,+>
S-O
0 E
0 +>
0
C)
a: ~-o
C') 0 ClJ ~
>::::!
~ ~0
0 ·.-- S-
<l:
w -o
C'l
c. CIJ4-
+>0
u
ClJ ~
r- 0
Cl)·.--
(/) +>
u
~
•::::!
LO 4-
,_,_ JUBid J6M0d SBUB:j.U6J\ SBl ......
C) I ~-o
~~""-' 0 ....... ClJ
UO!lBlS JOSSaJdwo~ uewall-}6)1 1"'"'"''"""''"':,::,1 N ClJ
Vl +>
~~
0 S- u
~ QJ•r-
0 0 0 0
1.1)
,... 0
,... 1.1)
C'lVl""O
.,.... "'
~
L..L. ..c.,....
S3A1V A C3.l Vt:l3dO-CJn1.::1 .:::10 t:I38VIInN
7-22
10446175
Recomended limits on operator height vs. pipe diameter
3 2
en
w
I
()
z
.._,
I-
I
('J
uJ
-..-
0
1-
<{
a:
w
c..
0
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0

PIPE DIAMETER (INCHES)
Air Operated Valves Surv1v1ng PGA>= 0.18g

KEY Number of Valves
# Manufacturers data specifies a cast iron yoke for th1s model
Figure 7-16. Histogram representing the experience data base for fluid-
operated valves, with recommended restrictions superimposed.
7-23
10446175
10446175
Section 8
MOTOR-OPERATED VALVES
Remote operated valves allow fluid flow in plant systems to be controlled from a
central control panel. Remote operated valves are generally categorized as
either actuated by fluid devices (such as diaphragm-operated valves), or by
electric devices (such as motors or solenoids). The equipment class of motor-
operated valves (MOVs) includes all valves actuated by either an electric motor
or a solenoid. The valve, the operator, and the attached conduit are included in
the equipment class of MOVs.

The data base includes a wide diversity of sizes, types, ages, and applications
of motor- and solenoid-operated valves. Each of these general types is discussed
in the sections below.
Motor-operated Valves
The primary components of a motor-operated valve are discussed below and
illustrated in Figure 8-1, along with an internal view of a motor operator
showing the control box, gear box, and drive motor.
The electric drive motor typically operates at 240/480 volts and is a

3-phase, 60-cycle unit.
The gear box includes the gears which link the valve actuation to the drive motor
shaft.
The complexity of the control system (or control box) included within a motor
operator depends on its vintage and application. Local controls typically
include a relay for actuating the primary circuit to the motor, and torque and
limit switches for coordinating the drive motor and the valve position.
Typically, the motor controller for the valve is mounted remotely in a motor
8-1
10446175
control center; however, modern valve operators may have a local motor controller
built into the operator housing, rather than in a remote MCC (Figure 8-9).
The valve actuator shaft is typically threaded through the steel support frame or
yoke.
The valve, which is actuated by a motor-operator, may be of any type, size, or

orientation.
Motor-operators may be mounted in any position (e.g., cantilevered vertically

above, below, or to the side of the valve). In some cases, the operator and yoke
form a double cantilever; the operator is offset to one side of the yoke, which
is cantilevered from the valve. The yoke, which connects the operator to the
valve body, may take the form of a steel pipe enclosing the actuator shaft or a
frame of welded beams. The attachments of the motor-gearbox to the yoke and the
yoke to the valve are typically bolted flange connections, threaded connections,
or ring clamps.
In some applications, motor-operators are mounted at a remote location above the

valve. In this configuration, the operator is usually mounted atop a steel pipe
that encloses the long valve actuator shaft (Figure
8-13). The pipe enclosing the shaft is typically supported at one or more
intermediate points prior to its attachment to the valve. This configuration may
occur in nuclear plants where the operator is mounted on a floor above a
contaminated cell containing the valve, or where valves are submerged in wells,
and the operator is mounted at ground level.
The size of the valve operator depends on the size of the valve and the power
required for valve operation. The smallest operators typically weigh about 100
pounds, with moment arms of one to two feet from the supporting pipe centerline.
Typical motor operators weigh about 300 pounds and have a moment arm length of
two to three feet. Larger motor operators can weigh as much as 2,000 pounds.
Solenoid-operated Valves
Solenoid operators are smaller and lighter than motor operators and have lower
power requirements and a faster response time. Solenoid-operated valves are
actuated by passing an electrical current through a coil, thereby creating a
8-2
10446175
magnetic field which opens or closes the valve. The primary components are shown
in Figure 8-2.
Solenoid operators are generally more compact than motor operators, presenting
less of a cantilevered mass supported from the valve body. In addition,
solenoid-operated valves are typically mounted on smaller diameter lines than
MOVs.
Equipment Anchorage
Anchorage of motor-operated valves includes the attachments of the motor-gearbox
to the yoke and the yoke to the valve. Attachments typically consist of bolted
flange connections, threaded connections, or ring clamps.
In nuclear plants, motor-operated valves are used on piping and duct systems to
allow fluid flow in plant systems to be controlled from a central control panel.
Examples of nuclear plant motor-operated valves are presented in Figure 8-3.
8.2 DATA BASE REPRESENTATION FOR MOTOR-OPERATED VALVES

Figure 8-4 through 8-14 present examples of motor-operated valves within the data
base. The data base inventory of motor-operated valves includes about 300
examples, representing 16 sites and 9 of the earthquakes studied in compiling the
data base. Of this inventory, there are no cases of seismically induced damage
to motor-operated valves.
Figure 8-15 presents a bar chart that illustrates the inventory of MOVs at
various data base sites as a function of their estimated PGA. Figure 8-16
presents the data base inventory of MOVs as a histogram, plotting number of
valves (and their weight) as a function of pipe diameter and operator height
above the pipe centerline.
The general bounds of data base representation for the equipment class of motor-
operated valves are summarized below.
The equipment class of motor-operated valves includes all valves actuated by

either an electric motor or a solenoid. The valve, the operator, and the
attached conduit are included in the equipment class of MOVs.
8-3
10446175
• Valve
• Operator
• Attached conduit to the nearest building anchor point

The plant includes about 35 motor-operated valves of various sizes and elevations
(Figures 8-4 and 8-5). Neither the valves nor their operators were damaged by
the earthquake.
The plant includes four large motor-operated valves, located atop the boiler
structure, that act as the main steam isolation valves for each unit (Figure 8-
6). In addition, there are several solenoid-operated valves, located next to the
boiler at the plant (Figure 8-7). Neither the valves nor their operators were
damaged by the earthquake.
The plant includes over 55 motor-operated globe and gate valves (Figures 8-8 and
8-9). The valve operators are mounted on both aboveground lines, and on
8-4
10446175
aboveground extensions of buried valves. Neither the valves nor the operators
were damaged in the 1983 sequence of earthquakes.

The experience data base contains no instances of seismic effects to motor-
operated valves. The data base contains no evidence of the malfunction of motor-
operated valves during an earthquake.
In addition, no instances of seismically induced damage to motor-operated valves

were found in an extensive literature search/telephone survey.

The seismic experience data base indicates that motor-operated valves possess
characteristics which generally preclude damage in earthquakes. The experience
data base includes no instances of seismic damage to motor-operated valves.
8.5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Limitorque Corporation. n.d. "Motorized Valve Operators."
2. Rotork Corporation. n.d. "Motor-Operated Valves."
3. Quail, B. W. and W. C. Carlos. June 1978. "Solenoid-operated Valves for
Nuclear Service." Power Engineering.
4. "IEEE Trial-Use Guide for Type Test of Class 1 Electric Valve Operators for
Nuclear Plant Generating Stations." December 1972. Std. 382-1972.
5. "IEEE Standard for Qualification of Safety Related Valve Actuators." 1980.
Std. 382-1972.
8-5
10446175
Figure 8-1. Components of a typical motor-operated valve.
8-6
10446175
Conduit connection
International terminal box
One piece bonnet construction
Metal encased coil

potted Impregnated
Class H insulation
NEMA 4 enclosure
Shock absorber spring
Gasket (alternate)
Seat seal
Figure 8-2. Components of a typical solenoid-operated valve.
8-7
10446175
Figure 8-3. Motor-operated valves in nuclear plant applications.
8-8
10446175
Figure 8-4. There are about 35 Limitorque motor-operated valves at the
Valley Steam Plant, located at all elevations. Neither the valves nor
their operators were damaged in the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake.
8-9
10446175
Figure 8-5. MOVs at the Valley Steam Plant, affected by the 1971 San
Fernando Earthquake.
8-10
10446175
Figure 8-6. At El Centro Steam Plant, located in the Imperial Valley,
motor-operators are used to actuate the main steam isolation valves in
each of the plant's four units.
8-11
10446175
Figure 8-7. There are several solenoid-operated valves at El Centro Steam
Plant, affected by the 1979 Imperial Valley Earthquake.
8-12
10446175
Figure 8-8. The Main Oil Pumping Plant in the near-field of the 1983
Coalinga Earthquake includes 55 Limitorque motor-operated valves.
8-13
10446175
Figure 8-9. At the Main Oil Pumping Plant, affected by the 1983 Coalinga
earthquake sequence, some MOVs include local motor controllers built into
the housing of the motor operator.
8-14
10446175
Figure 8-10. Each of the pumping stations along the San Luis Canal
includes four or five large vertical pumps with motor-operated valves on
the discharge lines.
8-15
10446175
Figure 8-11. There are about 50 MOVs at Las Ventanas Power Plant in
Chile.
8-16
10446175
Limitorque MOV mounted on a 6-inch line at the Renca Power Plant.
Solenoid valves located on the roof at Las Condes Hospital.
Figure 8-12. Motor-operated valves at sites affected by the 1985 Chile

Earthquake.
8-17
10446175
Figure 8-13. Remote valve operators at Las Ventanas Copper Refinery,
8-18
10446175
Figure 8-14. Motor-operated valves on a small bore piping at the City of
Commerce Refuse Facility near Whittier. The valves and their actuators
were undamaged by the 1987 Whittier Earthquake.
8-19
10446175
<tS
+>
<tS
"C
(I)
u
S::CI)
(!)>.,
·.- <tS
>..
CI)S::
c..o
.....
..J
X·.-
Cl)+l
._
<C u
us::
•.- ::l
z
0
E'+-
V)
•.- 4-
N CI)O
a:0 V)
V)
(I) V)
::t: .c:o
w +>,.....
"a:
<C
w
s:::s:::
.,....
.c:
+>
.,_.
C'l
•.- s:::
>
<C
)::·.-
..... V),.....
+>
z Cl)::l
~U'Bid W'B9lS OJ~U90 13 - ·

>VI
0 ,..... (I)
i= <tS>.
>
<C V)
a: "CCI)
w CI)U
..J +> s:::
w <tS<tS
0 >-+>
CI)V)
0 c..s:::
<C o·.-
c I
>..,.....
z
::J
0.--
+><(
0 0
a: E
JU'Bid J9M0d )J.I'BqJI19 "

::.:::
<C
4-S:::
00
•.-
>,+>
Al!J!O'B~ a}fBl a:tJnbsa~ w >.o
Cl
0
c. OE
+>
C') S:::"C
CI)S:::
0
~U'Bid JeMOd AB9 IPIOQWflH >::l
s:::o
•.- >..
lU'Bid J9M0d 9J'BPU9JE) "C
C'l
(1)4-
+> 0
.:::. u
CI)S:::
,..... 0
(!)•.-
,...,,.,.,.,,.. ---·--·>..J S'BUB~Ua}\ SBl Vl +>
s:::
u
Al!J!OB~ SIJ!H elUalld\~'Bid esflJel:l eoJewwoo ~o Al!o Cl
•::l
LO 4-
..... .
0 <tS"C
lU'BJd J8M0d 40'B98 pUOWJQ (\,J OJ
I
(I)
V) +>
Cl)<tS<tS
0 0 0 0 0 0 >.. u
U) It) o:t C') (\,J ::l (!)•.-
C'lVl"C
.,.... n:s c::
S3A1'1A 03.1. V~3d0-~0.LOW :::10 ~38WnN u.. ..0 ·.-
8-20
10446175
Recomended limits on operator height vs. pipe diameter.
100.0+--+---t---+---t---+- 4 --+---+--+---t---+---1-rl-.-.
90.0 4
~~~~ .. ···• .
1(300#)
80.0- 2(2000#)
70.0
en
!i! 60.0
0
z
1-
::t:
" 50.0-
w
X
a:
0
!;( 40.0
a:
w
0..
0
10.0
0.0
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 22.0 24.0
PIPE DIAMETER (INCHES)
KEY: Number of Valves (Operator Weight#")
#" Operator weight is omitted if data is not available
Buried pipe data omitted
Figure 8-16. Histogram representing the experience data base for motor-
operated valves.
8-21
10446175
10446175
Section 9
FANS
This class of equipment includes fans that are either free-standing or duct-
mounted as opposed to fans that are components of other classes of equipment such
as air handlers. Blowers and exhausters are included in the equipment class of
fans (Figure 9-6).

Industrial fans are divided into two general classes: axial (Figures 9-1 and 9-
2), and centrifugal (Figure 9-3).
Axial Fans
Axial fans are used in relatively low pressure applications such as building HVAC
systems or cooling towers. The two major types of axial fans are:
• Propeller Fans (Figure 9-1)

• Vane-axial Fans (Figure 9-2)
Propeller fans consist of two or more blades assembled on a central shaft and
revolving within a narrow mounting-ring. Propeller fans move air (without
developing significant pressure) simply by the angle of attack of the propeller
blades. Propeller fans are often mounted to a wall or ceiling and are typically
used for general ventilation or makeup air applications.
Vane-axial fans have an impeller wheel, typically with four to eight blades,
mounted to a central shaft within a cylindrical casing. Vane-axial fans are
generally used in higher pressure, higher flow applications than propeller fans.
Vane-axial fans include a set of guide vanes mounted either before or after the
impeller that streamline the air flow for greater efficiency. The vanes convert
much of the kinetic energy imparted to the air stream from the impeller into
9-1
10446175
increased air pressure, so that vane-axial fans can operate at differential
pressures of up to 12 inches of water.
A variation of vane-axial design are tube-axial fans, which include the higher
pressure impeller wheel mounted within a cylindrical casing, but without the
provision of vanes. Figure 9-2 illustrates both vane-axial and tube-axial fans.
Certain axial fan designs include multiple impellers for increased pressure
boost. Axial-flow fans are normally mounted inside cylindrical ducting,
supported by radial struts running from the duct wall to the duct centerline.
Electric drive motors are usually mounted along the duct centerline immediately
upstream of the impeller. The impeller and drive shaft are normally cantilevered
from the motor. Alternate designs mount the motor on the outside of the duct
with a belt connection between the motor and the impeller drive shaft. Belt
connections allow the fan and motor to operate at different speeds.
Many of the axial fans in the experience data base are the propeller-type, which
are typically found in cooling towers. Examples of data base propeller-type
axial fans are shown in the cooling towers in the San Fernando Valley (Figure 9-
7), and at the Union Oil Butane Plant (Figure 9-8). Examples of vane-axial fans
in the data base are shown in the forced-draft air system of the Glendale Power
Plant, and the HVAC system at Adak Naval Base (Figure 9-9).
Centrifugal Fans
Centrifugal fans are divided into three major categories depending upon the
position of their blades. The three blade positions are:
• Forward-curved
• Radial
• Backward-inclined
Forward-curved centrifugals (also called squirrel-cage fans) have blades inclined

toward the direction of rotation at the tip. These fans produce high flow
volumes at low static pressures and are the most widely used centrifugal fans for
general ventilation and packaged HVAC equipment.
9-2
10446175
Radial-blade centrifugals have their blades positioned on the radii extending
from their axis of rotation. These radial designs are the simplest and least
efficient type of centrifugal fan.
Backward-inclined fans are the third type of centrifugal fan and have their
blades inclined opposite to the direction of rotation at the tip.
Centrifugal fans typically have a cylindrical intake duct centered on the fan
shaft and a square discharge duct directed tangentially from the periphery of the
fan. A variation of the centrifugal fan is the tubular centrifugal fan which
redirects the discharged air in the axial direction. As with axial-flow fans,
centrifugal fans can have the electrical drive motor mounted .either directly on
the fan shaft, or outside of the fan casing with a belt drive to the fan (Figure
9-3). The impeller and drive shaft may have either a single-point support, where
they are cantilevered from the motor, or a two-point support, where the shaft is
supported both at the motor and at an end bearing.
Examples of centrifugal fans are found in the HVAC systems of the Vicuna Hospital
in Chile (Figure 9-10, upper photograph), of the Sylmar Converter Station (Figure
9-11), and in the HVAC and boiler draft systems of El Centro Steam Plant (Figure
9-12).
General Fan Characteristics

Fan capacity is measured in flow rate and differential pressure between the inlet
and the discharge. Air flow rates are measured in units of cubic feet per minute
(cfm), and differential pressure in units of inches of water head (30 inches of
water is approximately equal to 1 psi). Typical differential pressures range
from 1/2 inch to 5 inches of water, although some centrifugal fans can have
differential pressures ranging up to 12 inches of water. Air flow rates for
power plant applications typically range from less than 1,000 cfm to flows on the
order of 50,000 cfm. Corresponding fan drive motors typically range from 1 hp to
2oo hp, normally powered by 480 V systems. Typical weights of fan units range
from 100 to 1,000 pounds, depending on capacity and design details.
Equipment Anchorage
In power plant and industrial facility applications, fans are either free-
standing (forming the anchor points of duct systems), or they are mounted within
9-3
10446175
the duct systems they serve. Free-standing fans are typically attached to steel
frames (when mounted to ceiling or walls), or bolted directly to concrete pads
(when they are floor- or pad-mounted). Expansion bolts are generally used for
anchorage into concrete ceilings, walls or floors. Some floor-mounted fans are
anchored to embedded steel plates. Floor-mounted fans are often supported on
vibration isolation mounts which are designed to reduce the effects of operating
vibrations on the surrounding environment. Examples of free-standing centrifugal
fans are shown in Figures 9-10, 9-13, and 9-14.
Duct-supported fans are usually bolted to an internal steel frame enclosed by

sheet metal. Axial fans are supported within cylindrical ducts by a system of
radial struts, welded or bolted to the duct wall and converging on the bearing
supports of the motor/fan shaft. Examples of fans mounted within ducts are shown
in Figure 9-9 and 9-15.
Data Base Applications

Within the various data base sites, fans are normally used for the following
functions:
• To drive HVAC systems
• To force air through the boiler systems of fossil-fired plants
• To force air through cooling towers
• To force air into furnaces

In nuclear plants, fans are found in HVAC systems providing air space cooling to
critical areas such as the primary containment, the control room, the switchgear
room, critical mechanical equipment cells, and emergency engine-generator cells.
These HVAC systems include axial flow and centrifugal fans, either free-standing
or mounted within ducts or penetrations through floors and walls. Typical
nuclear plant fans are shown in Figures 9-4 and 9-5.
9.2 DATA BASE REPRESENTATION FOR FANS

Figures 9-6 through 9-19 present examples of fans within the data base. The data
base inventory of fans includes between 200 and 300 examples, representing 24
sites and 10 of the earthquakes studied in compiling the data base. Of this
9-4
10446175
inventory, the only instances that resulted in loss of function occurred at the
SICARTSA Steel Mill and the Fertimex Fertilizer Plant, affected by the 1985
Mexico Earthquake. There are several additional instances of damage associated
with isolation mounts not designed for seismic loads.
Figure 9-20 presents a bar chart that illustrates the inventory of fans at
various data base sites as a function of their estimated peak ground acceleration
(PGA).
The general bounds of data base representation for the equipment class of fans
Propeller, tube- and vane-axial fans are represented by the experience data base.
Propeller fans that are linked to their motor through either a belt drive or a
direct shaft connection are represented in the range from 10 to 150 hp. These
include propeller fans mounted in sheet metal enclosures (Figures 9-7 through 9-
9}, or mounted through wall or floor penetrations.
Centrifugal fans or blowers that are linked to their motor through either a belt
drive or a direct shaft connection are represented in the range from 5 to 700 hp.
These include free-standing centrifugal fans that are anchored to floors and
support attached ductwork (Figures 9-10, 9-13, and 9-14). The class also
includes centrifugal fans mounted within ductwork supported by rods or steel
framing from ceilings or walls (Figure 9-11, lower photograph).
• Fan impeller and its enclosure

• Drive motor
• Attached ducting between the fan and its nearest building anchor
point
• Louvers mounted in the fan enclosure
• Attached conduit and instrumentation lines between the fan
enclosure and the nearest building anchor point
9-5
10446175
Fernando Earthquake, is estimated to have experienced at least O.SOg peak ground
The station control building is a three-story steel-frame structure. Most of the

equipment of interest to the SQUG program is located either in the station
basement, or in the second floor HVAC rooms. The station contains 20 centrifugal
fans of various types, located in the basement and third floor. Photographs are
shown in Figure 9-11.
Several fans located on the third floor were supported on isolation mounts. One
fan damaged its isolation mounts during the earthquake. The isolation mounts
were made of cast-iron, and did not appear to be designed to accommodate lateral
loads. There are no reports that the damage to the isolation mounts rendered the
fan inoperable following the earthquake (i.e., there was damage to attached ducts
or conduit). Similar damage to isolation mounts on air handlers in the second
floor HVAC area were reported (Chapter 10).
site ground motion is based upon measurements recorded by an instrument at the
plant site, less than 1/2 mile from the plant.
The plant includes 10 large centrifugal forced-draft fans (Figure 9-12) mounted
on concrete pedestals adjacent to the boiler structures. Within the plant
turbine building, several large centrifugal fans are included in HVAC systems on
the ground floor and second floor. The forced-draft cooling towers adjacent to
the plant contain 16 large propeller fans mounted atop the tower structures.
There was no damage to fans at El Centro Plant during the 1979 Imperial Valley
Earthquake.
The Union Oil Butane Plant experienced a PGA of approximately 0.60g during the
nearest ground motion record of 0.56g (average of two horizontal components)
9-6
10446175
recorded at the Pleasant Valley Plant much further from the fault. The duration
of strong motion at the site was about 15 seconds.
The plant includes 16 large axial fans mounted in forced-draft cooling towers
(Figure 9-8). These fans are powered either by gasoline engines through a drive
shaft and gearbox link, or by electric motors through a belt drive. Based on
interviews with plant operators and management, it was determined that there was
no damage to fans or the cooling towers that house them during the sequence of
earthquakes near Coalinga in 1983.

The experience data base includes eight sites that experienced seismic effects to
fans as described below. At two facilities, the SICARTSA Steel Mill and the
Fertimex Fertilizer Plant, the damage resulted in loss of function.
At the Sylmar Converter Station, affected by the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake, a
centrifugal fan located in the third floor HVAC room, broke its cast-iron
isolation mounts. The isolation mounts were not designed to accommodate lateral
loads.
At Las Ventanas Copper Refinery and Foundry, affected by the 1985 Chile
earthquake, a centrifugal blower was found to have minor misalignment between the
blower and drive motor following the earthquake. The misalignment was detected
and corrected as a part of general plant maintenance following the earthquake.
It is not known whether the misalignment was earthquake induced or was a pre-
existing condition. The misalignment did not impair the normal operation of the
blower.
At the SICARTSA Steel Mill Auxiliary Power Plant, affected by the 1985 Mexico
Earthquake, the forced-draft fans associated with the plant's boilers suffered
shaft misalignment. The boilers are tied to the fan housings through a large,
heavy, rigidly attached duct system (Figure 9-17}. At the time of the
earthquake, two of the boilers were operating, while a third was down for
maintenance.
During the earthquake, one of the bottom-supported operating boilers shifted

eight inches, breaking the attached piping. Upon restart of the plant, vibration
9-7
10446175
was noticed in the fans serving the two operating boilers. The vibration, caused
by fan/motor shaft misalignment, was minor in one forced-draft fan and more
severe in the forced-draft fan serving the shifted boiler. Subsequent inspection
showed that, in one instance, the misalignment was sufficient to have cracked the
casing of one of the bearings supporting the impeller shaft. The misalignments
were caused by excessive loads imposed on the fan housing by a combination of the
boiler shifting (which is tied to the fan housing through the duct system) and
the inertial deflection of the heavy duct system itself, which was supported by a
flexible steel frame.
Shifting of the boiler imposed an anchor point displacement on the large duct
system from the forced-draft fan at the base of the boiler structure. The fan is
connected to the boiler through overhead ducts, routed from the top of the fan
housing. The displacement imposed on the duct system transferred load into the
fan housing. The force imposed on the fan housing in turn imposed a bending
moment on the fan/motor drive shaft. This led to fan/motor misalignment, and fan
vibration when the boiler was later restarted.
At the Fertimex Fertilizer Plant, affected by the 1985 Mexico Earthquake, three
forced-draft fans suffered shaft misalignments. The units are direct drive
centrifugal fans with 100 hp (est.) motors, and cantilevered impellers. The fans
are rigidly attached to a heavy steel plate duct system. The misalignments were
apparently caused by differential ground settlement at the site (at some places,
as much as 12 inches). In at least one case, the misalignment was sufficient for
the impeller to impinge on the fan housing.
At the Ticor data processing facility, which experienced an estimated PGA of

0.40g during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake, fans in the penthouse were knocked
from their non-seismically designed vibration isolation mounts (Figure 9-18).
Similar damage was seen at the Southern California Edison headquarters building
and at the Sanwa Bank Computer Facility.
At the Mesquite Lake Resource Recovery Plant, affected by the 1987 Superstition
Hills Earthquake, all four direct drive, forced-draft fans suffered misalignments
ranging from 0.003 to 0.011 inches (Figure 9-19). (The allowable misalignment
for these fans is 0.002 inches.) The misalignment may have been caused, in part,
by thermal affects. The fans had been aligned during the summer of 1987 and were
9-8
10446175
found to be misaligned after the earthquake in November. In addition to thermal
affects, the earthquake may have added to the alignment problems. The fans are
attached to a pendulum-supported boiler through a duct system. Seismic loads
transferred from the boiler, through the flexible duct system to the fan housing,
may have added to the fans' misalignment.
The experience data base contains no evidence of seismically induced malfunctions

(inadvertent starting or stopping) of fans.
Instances of seismically induced damage to fans are known to have occurred at

sites reviewed in an extensive literature search/telephone survey. These sites
are not included in the data base and few details about the incidents are known.
The most important examples are discussed below.
At the Kern Steam Plant, affected by the 1952 Kern County Earthquake, several fan
blades were damaged in the induced-draft cooling towers. In one fan/motor
assembly, the motor drive was operating but the fan was not turning. The shaft
was twisted and the coupling had pulled apart due to freezing of the worm gear
drive. At a second tower, excessive vibration had caused damage to 50 of 56 fan
blades.
Plant operators (contacted in 1987) stated that the damage was a result of
deformations of the very flexible wooden cooling tower structure, which caused
the fan housing to impact the fan blades. It was also noted that the blades were
made of a type of monal material (a brittle, nickel-copper alloy}, and were
replaced with a less brittle plastic blade.
At the University of California at Santa Barbara, affected by the 1978 Santa

Barbara Earthquake, several centrifugal fans on the roof of the Biological
Sciences Building failed their isolation mounts.
At the ENALUF Power Plant, affected by the 1972 Managua Earthquake, the forced-
draft and induced-draft fans associated with the boiler and exhaust system
suffered a minor misalignment following the earthquake. Following the
earthquake, the fans were placed back into alignment; no replacement was
required. The damage was apparently caused by boiler/duct movement, similar to
what was seen at the SICARTSA Steel Mill in Mexico. In this case, the concrete
9-9
10446175
columns supporting the boiler were heavily damaged, causing shifting of the
bottom-supported boiler and the attached ducting.
Other instances of seismically induced fan damage include damage to fan

anchorage/isolation mounts at several sites, including those affected by the 1964
Anchorage, Alaska Earthquake (including Elmendorf Air Force Base Hospital and the
Hodge Building), the 1979 Coyote Lake Earthquake (including Mary's Help
Hospital), and the 1979 Imperial Valley Earthquake (including the Imperial County
Services Building).

The seismic experience data base indicates that fans possess characteristics
which generally preclude damage in earthquakes. The few instances of seismic
effects demonstrate the following seismic vulnerabilities for fans:
• Isolation Mounts. Fans supported on isolation mounts, not

specifically designed to accommodate the lateral forces of an
• Attached Ductwork. Large centrifugal fans used for forcing air
into furnaces are usually attached to heavy systems of ductwork,
anchored at the fan housing, and then typically routed up a
flexible steel-frame boiler structure. The fan is normally mounted
to a solid concrete pedestal anchored to the ground or base mat.
Flexure of the steel-frame boiler structure, and the attached
ductwork, creates loads that are transferred through the duct
attachments into the fan housing and then into the impeller drive
shaft. Under extreme seismic motion these loads can cause minor
yielding in the impeller shaft or damage to the shaft bearings.
The result is misalignment of the fan and vibration upon restart of
the fan following the earthquake.
9.5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Kanis, T. W. December 1982. "Industrial Fan Primer." Heating/Piping/Air
Conditioning Journal.
2. Buffalo Forge Corporation. n.d. "Air Handling Equipment and Centrifugal
Pumps."
3. Buffalo Forge Corporation. n.d. "Research and Testing Creating Reliable
Air Handling."
4. Buffalo Forge Corporation. n.d. "Centrifugal Fans, Ventilating/Industrial
Service Manual."
9-10
10446175
5. Buffalo Forge Corporation. n.d. "Ventilating and Industrial Axial Fan
Service Manual."
6. Buffalo Forge Corporation. n.d. "Heavy Duty Fan Installation, Operation,
and Maintenance."
7. Holzhauer, R. August 18, 1983. "Axial and Centrifugal Fans." Plant
Engjneerjng.
8. Thomson, J. and J. Tirckler. March 21, 1983. "Fans and Fan Systems."
Chemjcal Engjneerjng.
9. Alden and Kane. n.d. "Centrifugal Exhaust Fans." Desjgn of Industrial
Exhaust Systems.
10. Reason, J. September 1983. "Fans." Power.
9-11
10446175
AlJTOIIMflc
DAMPER$
Qvssets
HEAVy DUty
PROPEl.tER FAN
0AMPSR
8EARINQ$ ~---._-..,;;.__ WIND BAND
Figure 9-J. Typfca) propeller-type axial fan.
9-]2
10446175
Courtesy Buffa1o Forge Company
\/A"'l~'i'<A;.
<::"'"' O<~~
Figure 9-2. Details of typical axial fans with direct motor drives and
belt drives.
9-13
10446175
Ii
!
f
Direct Drive Belt Drive

Configuration Configuration
Figure 9-3. Motor mounting configurations on centrifugal fans.
9-14
10446175
Figure 9-4. Typical fans used in nuclear plant applications include a
propeller ventilation fan mounted in the ceiling of a diesel-generator
room (upper photograph) and a duct-mounted axial, HVAC fan (lower
photograph).
9-15
10446175
Figure 9-5. Typical nuclear plant direct drive centrifugal fans (upper
photograph) and belt driven centrifugal fans (lower photograph.
9-16
10446175
Figure 9-6. Centrifugal blowers at the Union Oil Butane Plant in Coalinga
(upper photograph) and at the Puente Hills Energy Recovery Facility near
Whittier (lower photograph). The blowers were undamaged in their
earthquakes.
9-17
10446175
Figure 9-7. Typical propeller fans mounted atop cooling towers at the
Valley Steam Plant (upper photograph) and th~ Burbank Power Plant (lower
photograph); both plants are located in the San Fernando Valley.
9-18
10446175
Forced-draft cooling towers, such as the one shown above, contain a number
of propeller fans.
Several of the cooling tower propeller The rema1n1ng cooling tower fans are
fans are powered by gasoline engines powered by electric motors through
through a shaft/gearbox connection. a belt drive connection.
Figure 9-8. Examples of propeller fans at the Union Oil Butane Plant.
9-19
10446175
Figure 9-9. Tube- and vane-axial fans at the Glendale Power Plant in the
San Fernando Valley (upper photograph) and at Adak Naval Station {lower
photograph).
9-20
10446175
Figure 9-10. Examples of belt-driven centrifugal fans in the second floor
HVAC room of the Vicuna Hospital (upper photograph) and at the Bata Shoe
Factory (lower photograph). Both fahs were undamaged by the 1985 Chile
Earthquake although the facilities experienced an estimated PGA in excess
of 0.50g.
10446175
9-21
The third floor of the station includes several cantilevered centrifugal
HVAC fans supported on isolation mounts. During the 1971 San Fernando
Earthquake, isolation mounts were damaged on one of the units (similar to
unit on right).
The HVAC system also includes several centrifugal fans mounted in the
ducts such as this unit suspended from the ground floor of the building.
Figure 9-11. Examples of centrifugal fans at the Sylmar Converter Station.
9-22
10446175
The HVAC system of the
power plant includes
several cantilevered
belt-driven centrifugal
fans.
Large centrifugal fans

are found in the boiler
forced-draft air
systems. These units
are powered by 200 hp
electric motors through
a shaft connection.
Large motor-driven
propeller fans are
found in the plant
cooling towers
Figure 9-12. Examples of centrifugal and propeller fans at El Centro

Steam Plant.
9-23
10446175
Figure 9-13. Typical direct drive centrifugal fans at the Valley Steam
Plant in the San Fernando Valley (upper photograph) and the Humboldt Bay
Power Plant (lower photograph).
9-24
10446175
Figure 9-14. Typical belt-driven centrifugal fans at the Drop IV
Hydroelectric Plant in the Imperial Valley (upper photograph) and at the
Shell Water Treatment Plant in Coalinga (lower photograph).
9-25
10446175
Figure 9-15. The HVAC duct system (upper photograph) of the City of
Commerce Refuse-to-Energy Plant, affected by the 1987 Whittier Narrows
Earthquake, includes a vane-axial fan (close-up, lower photograph)
supported from the ceiling on spring hangers.
9-26
10446175
Figure 9-16. The City of Commerce Refuse-to-Energy Plant includes several
centrifugal forced-draft fans feeding its trash-burning boilers. Fans are
mounted both at ground level and within the lower floors of the steel-
frame boiler structure (arrows, lower photograph).
9-27
10446175
Figure 9-17. The forced-draft fans serving the boilers of the SICARTSA
Auxiliary Power Plant have a large duct system extending from the fan
enclosure into the boilers above. Displacement of boilers during the
earthquake, possibly combined with the inertial loads of the duct system,
created excess loads on the fan enclosure, with subsequent misalignment of
the motor/fan shaft.
9-28
10446175
Figure 9-18. In the penthouse at the Ticor Data Processing Facility
affected by the 1987 Whittier Earthquake, an axial fan, mounted on
vibration isolators, damaged its supports.
9-29
10446175
Figure 9-19. The Mesquite Lake Resource Recovery Plant, affected by the
1987 Superstition Hills Earthquake, includes several centrifugal forced-
draft fans, most of which were found to have minor misalignments following
the earthquake. The misalignments appeared to be caused by the loads
imposed on the fan housing, and subsequently the impeller drive shaft,
through the large exhaust duct system supported on the flexible steel-
frame boiler structure (upper photograph, arrows indicate fans).
9-30
10446175
s::
.....0
+>
u
s::
..:;~ ~
-~ '5 '+-
jz ~ "'
::~!; J\JOlOB:I ao1.1s ares
VI
C)
0 "'cu
i! I
'i:
JUBid JU9WJB9Jl .19JBM IIS4S
1-UBid 9UBlfl8 1!0 lJO!Un <D
0
VI
"' .
..c
ui nscu
-c
1;i ~
-t~
+> +>
IBJ!dSOH BlllO!A
"'"'
-cu .....
cu-e
£; i.
I us::
::J s::•.-
li ii;
cu cu
tnt-
< .....
~~
UO!lBlS Ja:j..I9AU~ 1BUJI1\S oz CUttS

~0 c.
xs::
u.lJ ON
~:
<(
~ g u. Jlf . a:
0
::t:
w
cuo
U+>
.....
Es::
u
~~ ~0 j
~~~~
CJ ..... '+-
< cu
•• I 1114-
tc 0::
w 0
> cu
C)
<
....
..S::. VI
+>Ill
0 z 0
vo
·ci i= .....s:: r-
..s::. s::
<
0::
+> .....
.....
w 3:C"l
..... s::
w VI·.-
() S::+>
() "'r-
< '+-~
VI
0 4-CU
z 0~
tn::J
oo >,VI
(')0:: ~cu
c)CJ ou
~
+>s::
s::ns
<
w
CU+>
>VI
0. s::s::
-c r-
cur-
+><C
u
1\'J!OB.::I SI!H 8lUerld\llJ"eld 8811181::1 eo cu
r-
cus::
.
V')O
0 It) 0 It) 0
...
It)
...
0 It) 0 • +>
0
'It (') (') N N OE
SN":I .::10 1::138WnN N
I "C
ens::
~
cuo
~~
~C"l
C"l
..... '+-
u..o
9-31
10446175
10446175
Section 10
AIR HANDLERS
Air handlers are sheet metal enclosures containing {as a minimum) a fan and a
heat exchanger, for the purpose of heating, dehumidifying or chilling air, and
distributing it to areas within a building, usually through a duct system.

The basic components of an air handler include a fan and a coil section {Figure
10-1). Small capacity, simple air handlers are often referred to as fan-coil
units. Additional components such as filters, air-mixing boxes, and dampers are
included in more elaborate air handlers {Figure 10-2). A brief description of
air handler components is included below.
• Fans produce air flow across the coil for heat transfer. Air
handlers normally use a centrifugal fan, with either a direct drive
motor or are belt-driven by an external motor.
• Coils act as heat exchangers in an air handler. Cooling coils are
rectangular arrays of tubing {typically 1/2 inch in diameter) with
fins attached to improve the heat transfer efficiency. The coils
are typically copper, with copper or aluminum fins.
• Filters are included to improve the quality of the distributed air.
The filters are either a strainer type {typically containing a
replaceable sheet of cellulose, glass fibers, cotton batting, wool
felt, or synthetic material), or the electronic type {the filter
ionizes the particles in the airstream with an electric charge and
captures them on a charged plate). Filters are typically mounted
in steel frames which are bolted together as part of a modular
system.
• Mixing Boxes are used as a plenum for combining two airstreams
{such as outside air and return air) before channeling the
resulting blend into the unit.
• Dampers are rotating flaps provided in the inlet or outlet sides of
the air handler to control the flow of air into or out of the fan.
10-1
10446175
Air handlers are typically classified as being either a draw-through or a blow-
through type. Draw-through air handlers have the heat exchanger (coil) upstream
of the fan, whereas the blow-through design locates the coil downstream.
Air handler enclosures normally consist of sheet metal welded to a framework of

steel angles or channels. Typical enclosures range in size from two feet to over
ten feet on edge, with weights ranging from 200 to 10,000 pounds. Large
components, such as fans and coils, are typically bolted to internal frames which
are welded to the enclosure framing. Fans may be located in a variety of
orientations with respect to the coil unit.
Air handlers typically include a system of attached ducts, which providei for the
intake and discharge of air. Additional attachments to air handlers include
piping for cooling water or refrigerant, electrical conduit, and instrumentation
lines.
Air handler capacity is measured in Btu (British Thermal Units) per hour of heat
transfer between air and the cooling medium (water or refrigerant). Typical
capacities range up to 100,000 Btu/hour.
Most commercial or industrial facilities that include a large volume of occupied

air space have centralized chillers (addressed as a separate class of equipment).
Chilled water or condensed refrigerant is pumped through piping systems to the
coils of remotely located air handlers within the facility.
Self contained air conditioning units are a variation of air handlers, in which
the sheet metal enclosure includes a small refrigeration unit. Air conditioning
units serve the purpose of a small air handler, where the facility is not large
enough to justify a centralized chiller. Examples of air conditioning units are
shown in Figures 10-9 and 10-10.
Equipment Anchorage
Air handlers are typically anchored to the floor by bolts through holes provided
in their base channels, or by clips clamping the bottom flange of the base
channel to the floor. Air handlers often include either an internal or an
external vibration isolation system. Internal systems isolate vibrations in
individual components from the sheet metal enclosure. External vibration
10-2
10446175
isolation systems support the entire air handler assembly above the floor.
Isolation systems are either spring type or rubber mounts.

Air handlers work in conjunction with a centralized chiller to cool, dehumidify,
or heat building air space. Air handlers are used in hospitals, computer
facilities, large commercial buildings, or in any structure where air quality and
temperature must be controlled.

In nuclear plants, air handlers are found in HVAC systems providing air space
cooling to critical areas such as the control room, the switchgear room, critical
mechanical equipment cells, and emergency engine-generator cells. Figure 10-3
shows typical nuclear plant air handlers.
10.2 DATA BASE REPRESENTATION FOR AIR HANDLERS

Figures 10-4 through 10-12 present examples of air handlers within the data base.
The data base inventory of air handlers includes about 90 examples, representing
15 sites and 9 of the earthquakes studied in compiling the data base. Of this
inventory, there are two sites that experienced seismic damage to air handlers
that resulted in a loss of function.
Figure 10-13 presents a bar chart that illustrates the inventory of air handlers
The general bounds of data base representation for the equipment class of air
handlers are summarized below.
Air handlers with centrifugal fans linked to electric motors through, either a
belt drive or a direct shaft connection, are represented in the range from 5 to
25 hp. Air handlers are represented in the range up to an estimated capacity of
100,000 Btu/hour. Air handler configurations which are represented range from
large floor-mounted units (Figures 10-4 through 10-6) to smaller units suspended
on rod hangers from ceilings (Figures 10-9 and 10-10).
10-3
10446175
• Sheet metal enclosure

• Fans and motors
• Heat exchanger coils
• Air filters
• Mixing boxes
• Dampers
• Attached ducts, instrument lines, and conduit between the enclosure
and the nearest building anchor point

The station control building is a three-story steel-frame structure. Air

handling equipment at the station is located on two floors. On the third floor,
the HVAC system includes six air handling units manufactured by the Baltimore Air
Coil Company {Figure 10-5, upper photograph). These large units {est. 5'x10'x8')
were undamaged by the earthquake.
On the second floor, 48 air handlers control the air temperature for the large
thyristor units used to convert de power to ac power {Figure 10-5, lower
photograph). At the time of the earthquake, these units rested on isolation
mounts which were not designed for seismic loads. During the earthquake, most
of the units were shaken from their mountings. Five of the units moved enough to
damage attached piping and ducts. Because power was lost to the Sylmar facility,
the operability of the air handlers is not known.
mile of the plant.
10-4
10446175
There are two large air handling units located on the turbine deck of Unit 1
(Figure 10-6). The units are evaporative coolers manufactured by the American
Blower Air Conditioner Corp. The units rest on steel skids mounted to a concrete
pedestal. The large ducts connected to the units are rod hung. These units were
not damaged by the earthquake.
of the 1983 swarm of Coalinga earthquakes. Strong-motion monitors are located in
the station switchyard, as well as in the basement, operating floor, and on the
The pumping plant is housed in a one-story concrete-block building. The plant

includes three air handling units (Figure 10-7), manufactured by the Air Therm
Company and anchored with 3/8-inch anchor bolts. There was no damage to air
handling units at this facility during the earthquake.

The experience data base includes two sites where seismic damage to air handlers
resulted in a loss of function, and two sites that experienced non-damaging
seismic effects.
At the Sylmar Converter Station, most of the air handling units on the second
floor of the station building were shaken from their isolation mounts during the
1971 San Fernando Earthquake (Figure 10-5, lower photograph). The mountings were
not designed to accommodate seismic loads. On five of the units, the movement
was sufficient to damage attached piping and ducts.
At the Southern California Edison headquarters, two rod-supported air handlers

swayed sufficiently to break attached l-inch water lines (Figure 10-8, upper
photograph). The site experienced a PGA in excess of 0.40g during the 1987
Whittier Earthquake.
At the Ticor Data Processing Facility, which experienced an estimated PGA of

0.40g during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake, air handlers in the penthouse were
dislodged from their vibration isolation mounts (Figure 10-11). Similar damage
10-5
10446175
occurred to roof-mounted air conditioning units at the Pacific Bell Rosemead
Station (Figure 10-12).
The data base contains no evidence of the seismic malfunction (inadvertent

starting or stopping) of air handlers.
Instances of seismically induced damage to air handling units are known to have
These sites are not included in the data base and few details about the incidents
are known. One example is discussed below.
At the Intel Semiconductor Facilities, affected by the 1980 Greenville

Earthquake, a small air handling unit, supported vertically by four rod supports
at the corners but not laterally braced, broke a small plastic supply line (PVC).
No other damage occurred.

The seismic experience data base indicates that air handlers possess
for air handlers:
• Isolation Mounts. Air handlers supported on isolation mounts, not

specifically designed to accommodate the lateral forces of an
• Attached Pioino. Flexibly supported units (e.g., ceiling-supported
on rod hangers) have shown a tendency to damage rigidly attached
piping.
10.5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Yseng-Yao S. August 1976. "Design Variations of Air Handling Unit."
Heating/Piping/Air Conditioning Journal: 60-61.
2. "Chilling Air Involves Many Heat Exchangers." June 1970. Power: 44-45.
3. Trane Air Conditioning. June 1981. "Climate Changers, Torrivents, Cabinet
Fans." OS CLCH-1.
4. Carrier Corporation. September 1984. Advance Product Data. Catalog No.
524-806.
5. Gaylord Industries, Incorporated. n.d. "The Gaylord HRU Heat Reclaim
Unit." Engineering Manual.
10-6
10446175
6. Marlo Coil Nuclear Cooling, Incorporated. n.d. Bulletin No.
NC-101.
7. Carrier Corporation. n.d. "Carrier Central Station Air Handling Units."
39E, ER.
10-7
10446175
/Shoat Metal Enclosure
Air Filter
Centrifugal
Fan Assembly
with Belt Drive,
Figure 10-1. Arrangement of basic components of an air handler.
10-8
10446175
Ecor.omizer
Dampers Face & Bypass
Dampers
Exhaust
Damper
Economizer/
Return Air
Section
Filter
Section
Air
Louvres Section
Draw-thru
Coil
Discharge
Section
Blow-through Air
Coil Section ?lenum
Figure 10-2. Example of a large air handler using modular construction.
10-9
10446175
Figure 10-3. Air handlers in nuclear plant applications.
10-10
10446175
Figure 10-4. Internals of a large, walk-in air handler at the IBM/Santa
Teresa Facility. The unit was undamaged by the 1984 Morgan Hill
Earthquake.
10-11
10446175
On the third floor of the station, there are six large air handling units
manufactured by the Baltimore Air Coil Company. These units were
undamaged by the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake.
There are 48 air handling units on the second floor of the station. All
were mounted on isolation mounts at the time of the earthquake; most
rocked free of their mounting, resulting in damage to attached piping or
ducts on five of the units.
Figure 10-5. The Sylmar Converter Station has a total of 54 air

handling units.
10-12
10446175
Figure 10-6. These evaporative coolers at El Centro Steam Plant are
located on the turbine deck in Unit 1. The units rest on steel skids
mounted to a concrete pedestal.
10-13
10446175
Figure 10-7. The Pleasant Valley Pumping Plant includes three air
handlers, all manufactured by the Air Therm Company.
10-14
10446175
Figure 10-8. The Southern California Edison headquarters experienced a
PGA in excess of 0.40g during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake. During the
earthquake, two rod-hung air handling units (upper photograph) swayed
sufficiently to break the attached l-inch lines. Other air handlers,
which had stiffer supports (lower photograph), were undamaged by the
earthquake. ·
10-15
10446175
The San Martin Winery includes six rod-hung air conditioning units.
Air handler suspended from the ceiling of the IBM/Santa Teresa Facility
on rod-hung trapezes.
Figure 10-9. Air handlers at sites affected by the 1984 Morgan Hill
Earthquake.
10-16
10446175
Control room at Power Plant Number 3.
UPS Facility.
Figure 10-10. Small ceiling-mounted air handling units at Adak

Naval Station.
10-17
10446175
Figure 10-11. At the Ticor Data Processing Facility, an air handler unit,
located in the penthouse, damaged its isolation mounts during the 1987
10-18
10446175
Figure 10-12. At the Pacific Bell Rosemead Station, affected by the 1987
Whittier Earthquake, two roof-mounted air conditioning units dislodged
from their isolation mounts. No damage was reported to the units, and the
supports were subsequently replaced, as shown in the photographs above.
10-19
10446175
30
* At tho Sylnar station ftve at 1\atdlg .,.._ - • elial<en from their lodatilo
........,... toomg attadled pipng and <Ld<o.
** At tho SCE Headlpwtero ~two r~ u ~ ..-.. owayed
IIJIIIclentlytotreel<attacllodpipng.
Ill h<lcatae • damaged lrlt.
Ill
a:
~ 20
...... c
0
I
z<(
N :I:
0
~
a: >.
:;;: ~
IL
0 "'
u..
Q)
·~
a: "' ~
w
~ "' ~
i~
m 10 <D >.
:!i j's .S!
j
::J
z 8 15 ~~ ~
$a,o§ "' ~
15 0
~<(
>
w
()
!
0
oil
0.20g 0.30g 0.40g 0.50g 0.60g 0.80g 0.90g
IH·AH400t0.041QUQ-20CLASSES
Figure 10-13. Selected inventory of air handlers within the seismic experience data base as a
function of ground motion. All instances resulting in loss of function are indicated.
10446175
Section 11
CHILLERS
Chillers are the key component in mechanical compression type refrigeration

systems. They chill water or condense refrigerant for indoor climate-control
systems which supply conditioned air for equipment operating environments and for
personnel comfort.

Chillers are the primary component in the chilled water, centralized HVAC systems
found in large commercial and industrial facilities. The basic components of a
chiller include a compressor, a condenser, an evaporator, and a control and
instrumentation panel (Figure 11-1). These components are also represented by
other equipment classes (e.g., air compressors, control and instrumentation
panels). Each component is described briefly below.
• Compressors draw the vaporized refrigerant from the evaporator and

force it into the condenser. The compressor may be either a
kinetic (centrifugal) or a positive displacement (reciprocating-
piston) type. Centrifugal compressors are more common in larger
capacity units.
• Condensers are heat exchangers which reduce the refrigerant from a
vapor to a liquid state. Chiller condensers are usually shell and
tube type heat exchangers, with refrigerant on the shell side.
• Evaporators (coolers) are tube bundles over which refrigerant is
sprayed and evaporated, the inverse function of the condenser.
Evaporator tubes can have either finned or plain surfaces. Basic
types of evaporators include flooded type evaporators (which
operate practically full of liquid refrigerant) and dry-expansion
units (which operate with very small amounts of liquid refrigerant
in the evaporator).
• Control panels provide local chiller system monitoring and control
functions. Typical components include: oil level switches/gauges,
temperature switches/gauges, pressure switches/gauges, undervoltage
and phase protection relays, and compressor motor circuit breakers.
10446175
11-1
Chiller components may be arranged in a variety of configurations. Typically the
evaporator and condenser are mounted in a stacked configuration, one above the
other, with the compressor and the control panel mounted on the side (Figure 11-
5, upper photograph, and Figure 11-8). Variations of this arrangement include
the side-by-side configuration, with the compressor usually mounted above the
condenser and evaporator (Figures 11-3 and 11-6), or a configuration with all
components mounted side by side on the skid. Components are usually bolted to a
supporting steel skid, which is, in turn, bolted to a concrete pad. Attachments
to chillers include piping for routing cooling water or refrigerant to the unit,
electrical conduit, and instrumentation and control lines.
The capacity of chillers is measured (in the United States) as tons of

refrigeration (1 ton= 12,000 Btu/hour). Typically, chiller capacities range up
to 1,000 tons. Corresponding chiller weights range up to about 40,000 pounds,
with the primary weight concentrated in the heat exchangers (evaporator and
condenser).
Equipment Anchorage
Chillers are typically anchored to a concrete pad by friction clips or bolts
through a base channel welded. to the evaporator and/or condenser. In some cases,
chiller systems may be welded to embedded steel plates. Due to the normal
operating vibration inherent in some chiller designs, vibration isolation mounts
occasionally support the compressor or the entire chiller skid.

Chillers are used in nuclear plant HVAC systems to supply conditioned air to
critical equipment operating environments and for personnel comfort. Chillers in
nuclear plants are generally similar to those included in the data base as
illustrated in Figure 11-2.
11.2 DATA BASE REPRESENTATION FOR CHILLERS

Figures 11-3 ~hrough 11-8 present examples of chillers within the data base. The
data base inventory of chillers includes about 30 examples, representing 10 sites
and 4 of the earthquakes studied in compiling the data base. Of this inventory,
the only instances of seismically induced damage to chillers occurred during the
Whittier earthquake, as the result of poorly designed anchor.
11-2
10446175
Figure 11-10 presents a bar chart that illustrates the inventory of chillers at
various data base sites as a function of their estimated PGA.
chillers are summarized below.
Chillers are represented in the capacity range from 10 to 1,000 tons. The data
base for chillers includes representation of units which are skid-mounted as well
as units with individually floor-anchored components. The mounting of the
evaporator and condenser includes side-by-side and stacked configurations.
• Compressor
• Condenser
• Evaporator
• Local control panel
• Support framing
• Attached piping, instrument lines, and conduit between the unit and
the nearest building anchor point

The station control building is a three-story steel-frame structure. There are

two chillers located in the basement of the station building (Figure 11-3). The
units are arranged in a side-by-side configuration with the compressor mounted
atop the evaporator. The chillers were undamaged by the earthquake.

11-3
10446175
nearest ground motion record of 0.56 (average of horizontal components) recorded
at the Pleasant Valley Plant much further from the fault.
The plant contains two cryogenic chillers, located in the plant yard (Figure 11-
4). The chillers are used to separate butane and propane from the natural gas
found in oil wells. The units are not HVAC chillers, but their components are
representative of those found in typical chilled water centralized HVAC systems.
The components are arranged on a steel skid which is bolted to a concrete pad.
The chillers were undamaged by the earthquake.
The IBM/Santa Teresa Computer Facility ~xperienced a peak ground acceleration of

approximately 0.37g, with strong motion occurring for about eight seconds, during
the 1984 Morgan Hill Earthquake. This facility includes several strong-motion
monitors, with one located in the free field, 100 yards from the main building.
A large central HVAC plant is located in a one-story concrete building.
There are four water chillers, located in the HVAC plant (Figure 11-5, upper
photograph), used to maintain a constant indoor temperature for the extensive
computer facilities. These chillers are arranged in a stacked configuration with
the condenser mounted atop the evaporator and the compressor located on the side.
The chillers were undamaged by the earthquake.

The seismic experience data base includes four instances of seismic effects to
chillers. All instances of seismic effects to chillers in the experience data
base occurred at sites affected by the 1987 Whittier Earthquake.
At the Southern California Edison (SCE) headquarters building, which experienced

an estimated PGA of 0.40g during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake, one of five
chillers damaged attached water lines (Figure 11-7). The chiller was supported
on spring isolation mounts which were also damaged by the earthquake.
At the nearby Ticor Data Processing Facility, which also experienced an estimated
PGA of 0.40g during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake, one of two chillers slid 4
inches. The units, manufactured by Trane, appeared to be unanchored (Figure 11-
8). Piping attached to the chillers runs through penetrations in the walls.
11-4
10446175
Movement of the chiller unit dragged the attached piping and damaged the wall
penetrations.
Two other sites in the epicentral area of the 1987 Whittier Earthquake: the
California Federal Bank Data Processing Facility and the Sanwa Bank Computer
Facility, had chillers that damaged their spring isolation mounts. Each site
experienced estimated PGAs on the order of 0.40g during the earthquake.
The data base includes no evidence of the seismic malfunction (inadvertent

starting or stopping) of chillers.
Instances of seismically induced damage to chillers are known to have occurred at

sites reviewed in an extensive literature search/telephone survey. These sites
are not included in the data base and few details about the incidents are known.
The most important examples are discussed below.
At the Olive View Hospital, affected by the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake,
centrifugal compressors were torn from their condenser and water chiller tube
bundles. The compressor was mounted on vibration isolators that were not
anchored to the floor.
Instances of seismic damage to chillers because of poorly designed isolation

mounts occurred at several sites affected by the 1972 Managua Earthquake
(including Banco Central and Hotel International).
At the University of California at Santa Barbara, affected by the 1978 Santa

Barbara Earthquake, a 14,000-pound centrifugal water chiller was knocked off its
vibration isolation supports. The unit was located atop the eight-story library
building. The supports were not designed for lateral seismic loads and did not
provide sufficient lateral restraint.
At the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, affected by the 1980 Greenville

Earthquake, one of 117 chillers serving the laboratory broke its mounting bolts
and shifted from its mounting frame (Figure 11-9).
11-5
10446175
The seismic experience data base indicates that chillers possess characteristics
which generally preclude damage in earthquakes. With the exception of units
mounted on vibration isolators, the experience data base includes no instances of
seismic damage to chillers.
11.5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. "Chilling Air Involves Many Heat Exchangers." June 1970. Power: 44-45.
2. The Carrier Corporation. June 1985. "Packaged Hermetic Centrifugal Liquid
Chillers D 1000 Series." Product Data: 192.
3. "Evaporative Air-Cooling Equipment." n.d. ASHRAE Handbook: 0257-0266.
4. "Air-Cooling and Dehumidifying Coils." n.d. ASHRAE Handbook: 0275-0292.
5. Brennan, D. April 5, 1973. "Performance Factors for Absorption Chillers."
Plant Engjneerjng: 110-113.
6. Roslyn, F. P. n.d. "Mechanical Refrigeration." Mark's Standard Handbook
for Mechanjcal Engjneers 19: 3-19.
7. Krekel, R. J. November/December 1969. "Environmental Control of
Electrical Equipment Rooms." IEEE Transactions on Industry and General
Application. Vol. IGA-5, No. 6: 740-751.
8. Holzhauer, R. March 4, 1976. "The Plant Air-Conditioning System." Plant
Engjneerjng: 60-66.
9. Holnes, G. V. R. September 1978. "Designing A Central Chilled Water
System." HeaUng/Piping/Mr CondiUoning Journal: 111-122.
10. Bernstein, A. July 1971. "Campus Planning - Chilled Water." Building
Systems Desjgn: 38-40.
11. "Engineered Refrigeration Systems (Industrial Design Practices)." 1984.
ASHRAE 1984 Systems Handbook: 1458-1458.
12. "Forced-Circulation Air Coolers and Defrosting." 1983. ASHRAE 1983
Equipment Handbook: 0301-0304.
13. Brennan, D. June 1, 1972. "Centrifugal Chiller Compressors." Plant
Engjneering: 52-54.
14. Miller and Felszeghy. December 1978. "Engineering Features of the Santa
Barbara Earthquake of August 13, 1978." UCSB-ME-78-2. EERI.
11-6
10446175
Motor Starter
Control Panel
Evaporator Courtesy Trane, Incorporated

Condenser
Figure 11-1. Primary components of a centrifugal compressor water

chi 11 er.
11-7
10446175
Figure 11-2. Chiller in nuclear plant application.
11-8
10446175
Figure 11-3. The Sylmar Converter Station, affected by the 1971 San
Fernando Earthquake, contains two chillers manufactured by the Chrysler
Corporation operating at 120 volts, 100 hp. The units are located in the
basement of the station building.
11-9
10446175
Figure 11-4. At the Union Oil Butane Plant, cryogenic chillers are used
to separate butane and propane from the natural gas found in oil wells in
the Coalinga area. The skid-mounted units were manufactured by Frick
Company and Rotoflow Corporation and are anchored with six l-inch anchor
bolts.
11-10
10446175
The chillers at the IBM/Santa Teresa Computer Facility maintain a constant
temperature for the computer equipment. The-units are Crane Centravac
combination chiller/heaters containing a 1,000-ton refrigeration unit.
The central HVAC plant of the Evergreen Community College includes two
chillers, manufactured by Chrysler Airtemp (550 ton) and Trane (450 ton).
Figure 11-5. Chillers at sites affected by the 1984 Morgan Hill Earthquake.
11-11
10446175
Figure 11-6. The Wells Fargo Bank Data Processing Facility includes four
Carrier chillers on the ground floor of the building. The units, which
include seismic stops in their anchorage, were not damaged by the 1987
11-12
10446175
Figure 11-7. The Southern California Edison headquarters buildings
include five chillers, ranging in capacity from 30 tons to 600 tons.
During the 1987 Whittier Earthquake, a 30-ton chiller damaged its spring
isolation mounts, damaging attached water lines.
11-13
10446175
Figure 11-8. At the Ticor Data Processing Facility, one of two unanchored
chillers slid about 4 inches, during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake.
Movement of the chiller's attached piping damaged wall penetrations.
11-14
10446175
Figure 11-9. This chiller at the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory broke its
mounting bolts and shifted its mounting frame during the 1980 Livermore
Earthquake (courtesy of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory).
10446175 11-15
15
* damaged
At SCE HeadqJarlers, a 30-ton chiler on sprilg Isolation mounts.
attached water Iiles .
~~~r~l~ll hlcates a damaged ~'
>.
~
=0 '-(])
ctl +-'
10 u.. 55 ole
~
a: ctl
(/) 0 (/)
w (]) '- '-
..... '- <D(])
..... (]) :it::
:I: I- a. ctl
0 c ctl >. 8 5- c
11. J!! ~~ 0-g :8
0 a.. g
(f) (]) ctl c
a: di ...... u. >. & :r: Ci5 J!!
~ $~ UJ
......
......
~
:::!:
;:::)
(])
0>
~
;::
o
a..
>.
di
_£;
c:::Ea;
J!!m:;
a.. - a.
gu.J!l
u..
0
(f)
a;
t::
(])
a..
a
<D
m z ·1 i I I iIJJ i ~
0 I 'I I t fil k l I? l It I /U t ?l l II \I fi I
0.20g 0.30g 0.40g 0.50g 0.60g
INV·CHL 40010.04 SQUG·20 CLASSES
Figure 11-10. Selected inventory of chillers within the seismic experience data base as a
function of ground motion. All instances resulting in loss of function are indicated.
10446175
Section 12
AIR COMPRESSORS
This equipment class includes free-standing air compressors together with

attached components such as air intakes, air receiver tanks, local control
panels, conduit, and discharge lines. Compressors that are components of other
classes of equipment such as air handlers or chillers are addressed in their
respective chapters.

Air compressors can be generally categorized as reciprocating piston or rotary
screw. The equipment class of air compressors encompasses a range of sizes,
configurations, and applications in power plants and industrial facilities. In
general, compressor configurations can be grouped as:
• Air receiver tank-mounted reciprocating piston or rotary screw

compressors
• Skid-mounted reciprocating piston or rotary screw compressors
• Free-standing reciprocating piston compressors
Regardless of size, type, or configuration, air compressors typically include the

following components:
• Electric drive motor

• Piston- or impeller-driven compressor
• Air receiver tank
• Air intake filter
• Air aftercooler
• Moisture separator
• Lubrication system
• Control and instrument panel
12-1
10446175
Large compressors typically include water jackets to cool the compressor casing
and the air aftercoolers, while smaller units are typically cooled by natural or
fan-assisted convection to the surrounding air.
Equipment related to air compressors includes vacuum pumps and high pressure
blowers. Because of their structure, these types of equipment are more
appropriately categorized with the equipment classes of pumps or fans (Figure 12-
5).
The various types and configurations of compressors are summarized below.
Reciprocating Piston Compressors. Reciprocating piston compressors are

constructed much like an automobile engine, with pistons encased in cast steel
cylinders compressing the gas, and a system of timed valves controlling the inlet
and discharge. Piston air compressors generally have one or two cylinders.
Multi-cylinder air compressors usually have multi-stage compression, with the
discharge of one cylinder feeding the intake of the next. The components of a
typical large unit are shown in Figure 12-1.
Cylinders are normally supported on a cast iron crankcase, which encloses the
rotating crankshaft, linked either directly to the electric motor through a drive
shaft, or indirectly through a belt linkage. Drive motor sizes range from
fractional horsepower to over 100 horsepower depending on compressor capacity.
Reciprocating piston compressors from the data base are shown in Figures 12-6 and
12-7.
Rotary Screw Compressors. Rotary screw compressors replace the reciprocating

piston with a set of helical screws, typically encased in a cast iron block. The
rotary screw design is a somewhat simpler mechanism than the reciprocating piston
in that the system of timed intake and discharge valves are not required.
Otherwise the components and attachments of the air compressor are similar to
reciprocating piston units. Figure 12-3 illustrates the typical internals of a
rotary screw compressor. Figure 12-8 shows sample rotary screw air compressors
from the data base.
Compressor Mounting Configurations

Perhaps the most common configuration for power plant and industrial applications
has the air compressor mounted atop its air receiver tank. Tank-mounted units
12-2
10446175
may include either a piston or a rotary screw compressor. The units are usually
not large, ranging in capacity from 1 to 100 cfm (cubic feet per minute of
discharge air), with drive motors ranging from a fractional horsepower up to 30
hp. Tank-mounted compressors range in weight from 200 to 2,500 pounds. The
primary components of a typical receiver tank-mounted compressor are illustrated
in Figure 12-2. Examples from data base sites are shown in Figures 12-6 and 12-
9.
Skid-Mounted Compressors. Some manufacturers find it convenient to mount the

components of a compressor on a steel chassis or skid. The skid may be either
open or enclosed in a sheet metal housing. The skid is normally constructed of a
welded steel frame with the compressor, drive motor, receiver tank, control
panel, and other components bolted to the frame in some convenient configuration.
As with receiver tank-mounted units, the compressor may be either a rotary screw
or piston mechanism. Skid-mounted compressors typically range in capacity up to
about 2000 cfm, with drive motors of up to 300 hp. Skid-mounted compressors
range in weight from 2,000 to 8,000 pounds. The typical components of an
enclosed skid-mounted rotary screw compressor are illustrated in Figure 12-3.
Examples of skid-mounted compressors from data base sites are shown in Figures
12-10 and 12-12 (lower photograph).
Free-Standing Compressors. Free-standing compressors are usually the

reciprocating piston type, most often including one or two cylinders cantilevered
from a crankcase. The crankcase may form the primary support for all components,
or it may be mounted on a steel or cast iron pedestal. Free-standing compressors
include the largest units typically found in power plant or industrial
applications, ranging in capacity up to 4000 cfm, with drive motors up to 1000
hp. Free-standing compressors range in weight from small units on the order of
500 pounds to units as large as 10 tons. Figure 12-1 illustrates the typical
components of a free-standing reciprocating piston compressor. Examples of free-
standing compressors from data base sites are shown in Figure 12-7.
Equipment Anchorage
Compressors are normally bolted to the floor through the base of their skid or
mounting block, using either cast-in-place or expansion anchor bolts. Smaller
compressors are occasionally supported on isolation mounts.
10446175
12-3
The primary function of a compressor is to deliver air to pneumatic control or
instrumentation systems. Typically, a host of pneumatic systems are powered from
a single plant compressor, which forms a utility system in the plant in the same
manner as water or power. In addition, emergency generators often require a
small compressor for air-powered starting systems.

Air compressor applications in nuclear plants are essentially the same as in the
power plants and industrial facilities that comprise the data base. Air
compressors supply operating pressure to pneumatic instrumentation and control
systems, in particular to diaphragm-operated valves. Air compressors also charge
pressurized air receiver tanks that serve the pneumatic starting systems for
emergency engine-generators. Typical nuclear plant air compressors are shown in
Figure 12-4.
12.2 DATA BASE REPRESENTATION FOR AIR COMPRESSORS

Figures 12-6 through 12-12 present examples of air compressors within the data
base. The data base inventory of compressors includes about 125 examples of
reciprocating-piston air compressors, representing 30 sites and 11 of the
earthquakes studied in compiling the data base. Of this inventory, there are no
examples of seismically induced damage to air compressors that resulted in loss
of function.
Figure 12-13 presents a bar chart that illustrates the inventory of air
compressors at various data base sites as a function of their estimated peak
ground acceleration.
The general bounds of data base representation for the equipment class of air
compressors are summarized below.
Reciprocating piston and rotary screw air compressors are represented in the
range from 5 to over 7,000 hp, including the large engine-driven natural gas
compressors near Coalinga (Figure 12-11). Compressor motor-to-piston connections
include both belt-driven and direct shaft linkages. Configurations of compressor
components include free-standing one- and two-cylinder units (Figures 12-7 and
12-4
10446175
12-10), units mounted atop air receiver tanks (Figures 12-6 and 12-9), and skid-
mounted units (Figures 12-8, 12-10, and 12-12).
• Block with piston- or impeller-driven compressor

• Drive motor
• Air receiver tank if the compressor is attached
• Attached cooling coils and air intakes
• Attached air discharge lines, instrument lines, and conduit between
the compressor and the nearest building anchor point

The station control building is a three-story steel-frame structure. Six

reciprocating-piston air compressors are located in the station basement (Figure
12-9). The compressors are mounted to their air receiver tanks, which are either
bolted to the concrete floor, or supported on isolation mounts. The compressors
were undamaged during the earthquake.
1979 Imperial Valley Earthquake. The duration of motion at the site is estimated
at about 15 seconds. The site ground motion is based on measurements by an
instrument less than 1/2 mile from the plant.
The plant includes seven air compressors located on the ground floor (Figure 12-
10). The units are belt-driven by electric motors. The belt drive links the
motor to a large flywheel attached to a gearbox. The single cylinder is
cantilevered from the front of the gearbox as shown on Figure 12-10 (lower
photograph). The compressor and drive motor are bolted to a common steel base
that is in turn bolted into a concrete pedestal. The compressors were undamaged
by the earthquake.
12-5
10446175
approximately 0.60g during the Coalinga Earthquake. This PGA is a conservative
estimate, based on the nearest ground motion record of 0.56g (average of two
horizontal components) recorded at the Pleasant Valley Plant much further from
the fault.
The plant contains 14 large engine-driven reciprocating-piston compressors, which

are used for reinjection of waste gas into oil wells. The compressors are
mounted on concrete pedestals within a one-story sheet metal building (Figure 12-
11, upper photograph).
All compressors at the plant were undamaged by the earthquake. A broken small-
bore pipe in the plant's pneumatic instrumentation system caused the large
engine-driven compressors to shut down during the earthquake. The pipe break was
located in a remote section of the plant, and therefore should not be considered
a peripheral attachment to the compressors.
the Coalinga sequence of earthquake in 1983. The ground motion spectrum
applicable to the Union Oil Plant is applicable to the nearby Main Oil Pumping
Plant site.
The plant includes reciprocating-piston air compressors located in the equipment

yard (Figure 12-12). These include units mounted to air receiver tanks, and
units mounted to steel skids. The steel skid also supports a control panel and
receiver tanks. All compressors are anchored to concrete pads with either
friction clips or small (3/8" estimated) expansion anchors. All units were
undamaged by the earthquake, although evidence of minor slipping was observed on
the unit anchored by friction clips (Figure 12-12, lower photograph).

The experience data base contains no examples of damage, or significant seismic
effects to air compressors. The data base contains no evidence of seismic
malfunction (inadvertent starting or stopping) during an earthquake.
Instances of seismically induced damage to air compressors are known to have

12-6
10446175
are known. The most important examples are discussed below.
Seismic damage to air compressors from inadequate anchorage or poorly designed

isolation mounts has occurred at several sites, including those affected by the
1971 San Fernando Earthquake (including Olive View Hospital), the 1972 Managua
Earthquake (including Cia. de Productos Atmosfericos), and the 1976 Kyzyl-Kum
(Soviet Union) Earthquake (including Gazly Gas Field).

The seismic experience data base indicates that air compressors possess
exception of units mounted on vibration isolators, the experience data base
includes no instances of seismic damage to air compressors.
12.5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. "Compressors." September 27, 1984. Machine Design.
2. Stein, H. L. n.d. A Compressor Primer for Engineers.
3. "Air Compressors." April 1982. Power.
4. O'Keef, W. December 1978. "Compressed Air Auxiliary Equipment." Power.
5. Dresser Industries, Inc. n.d. "Model HBA: Super Two-cycle Right Angle
High Compression Gas-engine-driven Compressor Units."
6. Quincy, Inc. n.d. "Quincy QR-100 Series: Air or Water-cooled Single or
Two-stage Compressors."
7. Quincy, Inc. n.d. "Quincy QDD Series Compressors."
8. Quincy, Inc. n.d. "The QR-25FE Series from Quincy Compressor."
9. Quincy, Inc. n.d. "The QR-25 Series Air Compressors and Vacuum Pumps."
10. Quincy, Inc. n.d. Compressed. Air Handbook.
11. Compressed Air and Gas Institute. n.d. "Air Compressor Selection and
Application, 1/4 hp through 25 hp."
12. Gardner-Denver, Inc. n.d. "Gardner-Denver Compressors and Blowers."
12-7
10446175
Piston
Intercooler Annular valves
Cylinder
Water trap
Piston rod seals
Piston rod
......
N
co
I · Crossheads
Connecting rod
·. Double distance piece

Main-bearings
Oil Pump Balanced crankshaft

Courteey Atlaa Copoo
Figure 12-1. A two-stage reciprocating piston compressor showing typical components and
attachments.
10446175
ASME AIR/OIL
RESERVOIR
MOTOR STARTER AND

CONTROL SYSTEM
!OPTIONAL ON
QST-25 30 & 40)
Oil THERMAL
VALVE
'ELECTRIC
MOTOR
AIR DISCHARGE
OST COMPR VALVE
'MODULATING
CAPACITY CONTROL
!OPTIONAL)
ASME AIR
RECEIVER
·Not shown tn photo.
Courtesy Colt Industries
Figure 12-2. Various types of small compressors mounted atop air receiver
tanks. Typical components are shown in the lower photo.
12-9
10446175
•
Intake air II Condensate
Low pressure air • High pressure air "' CooUng water
1 Courtesy Atlas Copco
1. Instrument and
control panel
. Air intake filter
I
and silencer
. Inlet throttle valve
- -------- ~. Intercooler
5. High pressure stage
discharge silencer
6. Check valve
- -------7. Bleed-otf cooler
----------8. Low pressure stage
--------9. High pressure stage
10. Moisture trap
,.-jii-F-------1 1. Electric motor
rf:"tti"-·· - - - 12. Breather-comPressor
od sump
lliit,.;.l;--E:t::-----; ~: ~~:~~~~~~~~~mp
Oil coOler
mo1sture trap
J,~tj~~~;:~~~~~~=~===15.
---·-- ~ ~: ~~=~:-oft valve
1S. Servo valve
19. Solenoid valve
20. Oil pressure
safety switch
21. Air temperature
safety switch
22. Bleed-ott pressure
satety switch
Figure 12-3. A skid-mounted, enclosed, rotary screw compressor showing

typical components and attachments. The sketch at top is an air flow
diagram.
12-10
10446175
Figure 12-4. Typical air compressors used in nuclear plant applications.
12-11
10446175
Figure 12-5. Equipment related to air compressors such as vacuum pumps
(upper photograph, Glendale Power Plant) and high pressure blowers (lower
photograph, Union Oil Butane Plant) are categorized as pumps and fans
(respectively), based on their structure.
12-12
10446175
Figure 12-6. Compressors mounted atop air receiver tanks at the Pleasant
Valley Pumping Plant in Coalinga (upper photograph) and the IBM/Santa
Teresa Facility in Morgan Hill (lower photograph).
12-13
10446175
Figure 12-7. Large reciprocating air compressors (with approximately 100
hp motors) at the Burbank Power Plant in the San Fernando Valley (upper
photograph) and Concon Petroleum Refinery in Chile (lower photograph).
12-14
10446175
Figure 12-8. Rotary screw air compressors at the Whakatane Board Mill in
New Zealand (upper photograph) and at the Mesquite Lake Resource Recovery
Plant in Superstition Hills (lower photograph). The units were undamaged
in their earthquakes.
12-15
10446175
The station contains several compressors mounted to their air receiving
tanks, with attached cooling coils.
These smaller compressors, mounted atop their air receiving tanks, are
belt-driven by electric motors.
Figure 12-9. Examples of small reciprocating-piston air compressors

located in the basement of the Sylmar Converter Station.
12-16
10446175
Figure 12-10. Examples of service air compressors located on the ground
floor of El Centro Steam Plant.
10446175
12-17
Figure 12-11. The Union Oil Butane Plant (upper photograph) and Kettleman
Compressor Station (lower photograph) include large reciprocating
compressors, powered by natural gas-fueled piston engines built into the
compressor block. The compressors are anchored to the concrete foundation
at grade level and enclosed in large sheet metal high-bay buildings.
12-18
10446175
The plant contains
several examples of
small compressors
mounted to their air
receiver tanks.
This skid-mounted set of three compressors also includes a local control

panel and two air receiver tanks. Evidence of minor slipping of the
friction-clip anchorage on this unit was observed following the
earthquake.
Figure 12-12. Examples of small reciprocating-piston air compressors at

the Main Oil Pumping Plant.
12-19
10446175
OZ-ZI
~..,.,
.... NUMBER OF AIR COMPRESSORS
--t,tC
cc
::::s-s
nco 0 0'1
...
0
...
0'1
1\J
0
1\J
0'1
(.)
0
..........
c-+ 0
0 N
::::SI
1\J
0
}' :1:1 Kettleman Compressor Station
..... Ul
ow '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''{! .
""""" . ,,,,,,,, ""'""'' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' }" ' '"'~ Adak Naval Stat1on
tC
-sen
,,,, Las Ventanas Power Plant, Copper Refinery
OCD
c ---'
::SeD
' )I : Concon Facilities
o..n Renca Power Plant
c-+ 1
3CD
0 c.. ' 2 ± Glendale Power Plant
.....
c-+ "tl
m
o::::s )> 0 Drop IV Hydro Plant
::::S<
CD
::::s
c-+
0
"·
~ 0
:D Ul
(.)
ttittirrOhxriiquim Chemical Plant. Laguna Verde Power Plant
,~~~H~u~miboilt Bay
0
~ c Power PlantPlant
0 z W Burbank Power
0
""""" )>
.....
~
(')
-s (')
m
n r
0
3
m
"'0 :D
-s
···~~~
)> 0
::! ~ Rapel Hydro Plant
CD
Vl
Vl 0 0
0
-s ~Ul
Vl )> El Centro Steam Plant
.....
:E <
m
c-+ :D
:::::,-
.....
::::s
)>
~
m
c-+ ::I:
::::,-
CD 0
:D
IB1~iii~~::~onverter Station
Vl
N
....CD 0 0
Vl z (,
.....
3 -1 0
n )> Ul
r
.......
CD
X
"'0 Pleasant Valley Pumping Plant
CD
-s
.....
CD
::::s
n
CD
c..
~
c-+
~ 0 BltliBBBBBBBBBlllilllil Union Oil. Main Oil Facilities
C" m San lsicto Substation
~ 0
Vl Ul
CD Bata Shoe Factory
~
Vl
10446175
Section 13
MOTOR-GENERATORS
This equipment class includes motors and generators that are coupled into a
motor-generator set (M-G set). Auxiliary components such as a flywheel, conduit
and instrumentation that are directly attached to the motor, the generator, or
the supporting skid are also included within this class.

Motor-generators are a type of uninterruptible power supply (UPS) system commonly
used in older power plants and industrial facilities.
Figure 13-1 shows the typical components of a motor-generator set. M-G sets
normally include either an ac or de motor attached through a direct shaft drive
to an ac or de generator. A large flywheel is often mounted at one end of the
shaft for storage of rotational inertia, to prevent fluctuations in generator
output. Usually, both the motor and generator in an M-G set are mounted to a
common drive shaft and bolted to a steel skid. Smaller sets sometimes house the
motor and generator within the same casing. Data base motor-generator set
weights range from 50 to 5,000 pounds.
Anchorage
Motor-generator sets are typically anchored to a concrete floor or pad, using
expansion or embedded anchor bolts through holes provided in the bottom channel
of the skid. Motor-generators are occasionally supported on isolation mounts.
The general applications of motor-generators in power plants or industrial
facilities include:
• As an emergency power source to convert de power (from a battery

rack) to ac power
13-1
10446175
• As a source of de power from ac power (for charging batteries)
• As a source of stable voltage, free from the fluctuations of the
normal ac source
• As a means of changing the frequency of the normal ac source

In nuclear plants motor-generators are used as a UPS system, often as a backup to
an inverter. M-G sets are typically found in older nuclear plants. Examples of
nuclear plant M-G sets are presented in Figure
13-2.
13.2 DATA BASE REPRESENTATION FOR MOTOR-GENERATORS

Figures 13-3 through 13-9 present examples of motor-generators within the data
base. The data base inventory of M-G sets includes about 25 examples,
base. Of this inventory, there are no instances of seismically induced damage to
M-G sets.
Motor-generator sets are structurally similar to horizontal pumps. Horizontal

pumps consist of an electric motor connected to a pump through a shaft; motor-
generators are basically two motors connected through a common shaft. The
experience data base includes hundreds of examples of horizontal pumps
(horizontal pumps are addressed in
Chapter 5).
Figure 13-11 presents a bar chart that illustrates the inventory of M-G sets as a
function of their estimated peak ground acceleration.
The general bounds of data base representation for the equipment class of motor-
generators are summarized below.
Motor-generator sets are represented in the range of 7.5 to 500 hp, and 5 to 400
kW. Smaller units typically include the motor and generator in the same casing.
Larger M-G sets are skid-mounted, with the anchorage to the floor ranging from
four 1/2-inch bolts to six l-inch bolts.
13-2
10446175
Data base representation includes the following M-G set components:
• Motor
• Generator
• Flywheel
• Attached conduit to the nearest building anchor point

Fernando Earthquake, is estimated to have experienced at least O.SOg PGA, with
about 10 seconds of strong motion.
The station control building is a three-story steel-frame structure. Three large

motor-generator sets are located in the basement of the station (Figure 13-3,
upper photograph). Each unit consists of an induction motor driving either a de
generator or an ac generator. The M-G sets were undamaged by the earthquake.
Burbank Power Plant was also reviewed in the SQUG pilot program. The plant,
located in the Burbank/Glendale area of the San Fernando Valley, is estimated to
have experienced a peak ground acceleration of 0.30g, with about 10 seconds of
strong motion during the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake.
The Burbank Power Plant is made up of two facilities: the two-unit Olive Plant,
and the four-unit Magnolia Plant. Both facilities have concrete shear wall
turbine buildings. The Burbank Power Plant includes three motor-generator sets
(Figure 13-4), two on the ground floor of the Olive units and one in the basement
of the Magnolia unit. The M-G sets range in size from 10 to 170 kW, and are
skid-mounted. The M-G sets were undamaged by the earthquake.
The Southern California Edison Dispatch Center recorded an average horizontal PGA
of 0.56g during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake. The duration of strong motion was
from 3-5 seconds.
The main building of the dispatch center is a two-story concrete-frame structure.

Two large motor-generators are located on the ground floor of the building
13-3
10446175
(Figure 13-5). The units were manufactured by Kato and operate at 50 hp. TheM-
G sets were undamaged by the earthquake.

The experience data base contains no examples of damage or significant seismic
effects to motor-generators. The data base contains no evidence of the seismic
malfunction (inadvertent starting or stopping) of M-G sets.
Instances of seismically induced damage to motor-generator sets are known to have

occurred at sites reviewed in an extensive literature search and telephone
incidents are known. In particular, damage to the small M-G sets, included in
elevator systems of conventional buildings (Figure 13-10), from poorly designed
anchorages have frequently occurred during earthquakes. The most important
examples are discussed below.
Seismic damage to motor-generator sets from inadequate anchorage or poorly

designed isolation mounts has occurred at several sites, including those affected
by the 1964 Anchorage, Alaska Earthquake (including Elmendorf Air Force Base),
the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake (including Olive View Hospital), the 1972
Managua Earthquake (including the ENALUF Building, Banco Central, and the Hotel
Intercontinental), the 1976 Guatemala Earthquake (including the Finance Ministry
Building), the 1978 Santa Barbara Earthquake (including UCSB), and the 1980
Greenville Earthquake (including Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory).

The seismic experience data base indicates that motor-generators possess
exception of units mounted on vibration isolators, the data base and literature
survey revealed no additional tendencies for seismic damage to motor-generators.
13.5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Schmitt, N. and R. L. Winchester. November/December 1975. "Today's Large
Generators Design, Performance and Operation." Transactjons on Power
Apparatus and Systems. Vol. PAS-94, No. 6: 2115-2123.
2. "Product Guide to Electric Power Generating Equipment."
September 1977. Heatjng/Pjpjng/Ajr Condjtjonjng Journal 75.
13-4
10446175
3. O'Keefe, W. April 1975. "In-Plant Electric Generation." Power: s.1-
s.24.
4. Glass, D. December 9, 1976. "Standby/Emergency Generator Safety
Procedures." Plant Engineering: 141-142.
5. "Generating Ideas." December 1976. The Engineer: 49-50.
6. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. n.d. "Qualification Test of Continuous-
Duty Motors Installed Inside the Containment of Water-Cooled Nuclear Power
Plants." Regulatory Guide 1.40.
7. McPartland, J. F. and W. J. Novak. n.d. Electrical Equipment Manual. 3rd
Ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
8. Peach, N. May 1960. "Modern Uninterrupted-Power Sets." Power: 74-76.
9. Plankenhorn, J. H. March 1982. "Engine Generation Sets and Controls."
Specifying Engineer: 141-146.
10. O'Connor, J. J. June 1955. "Motors." Power: 74-104.
11. McDougal, W. L. n.d. "Direct-Current Motor Controllers." Direct Current
Motors and Generators: 279-319.
12. McDougal, W. L. n.d. "Types of Direct-Current Generators." Direct
Current Motors and Generators: 77-109.
13. General Electric Company. n.d. "Horizontal ac Motors and Generators-M.G
Set Packages."
14. Kato Engineering Company. n.d. "Motor-Generator Sets and Control System."
15. Caterpillar Company. n.d. "Performance-Matched Generator Sets."
16. Atlas Company. n.d. "Rotary Plus."
17. Inland Motor Kollmorgen Corporation. n.d. "Selection Guide."
18. Generator Corporation. n.d. "Power Systems, Frequency Converters and
Generators."
19. Generator Corporation. n.d. "Motor Generators As Computer Power Sources."
13-5
10446175
Courtesy Allis Chalmers
Figure 13-1. Typical motor-generator set.
13-6
10446175
Figure 13-2. Motor-generators in nuclear plant applications.
13-7
10446175
Figure 13-3. There are three motor-generator sets serving the Sylmar
Converter Station (upper photograph) and two serving the Glendale Power
Plant (lower photograph). Both facilities were affected by the 1971 San
Fernando Earthquake.
13-8
10446175
Figure 13-4. There are three motor-generator sets at the Burbank Power
Plant in the San Fernando Valley. Two units are associated with Olive
Units 1 and 2 (upper photograph) and one is associated with Magnolia Unit
4 (lower photograph).
13-9
10446175
Figure 13-5. The ground floor of the SCE Dispatch Center includes two 50
hp Kato motor-generators. The units were undamaged by the 1987 Whittier
Earthquake.
13-10
10446175
Figure 13-6. Motor-generator sets at El Centro Power Plant (upper
photograph) and at the Drop IV Hydroelectric Plant (lower photograph).
Both facilities were affected by the 1979 Imperial Valley Earthquake.
13-11
10446175
Figure 13-7. Motor-generator set at the Laguna Verde Power Plant affected
by the 1985 Chile Earthquake.
10446175
13-12
Figure 13-8. The SICARTSA Steel Mill, affected by the 1985 Mexico
Earthquake, includes several large motor-generators. The units were
undamaged in spite of an estimated PGA of 0.25 to 0.50g at the site.
13-13
10446175
Figure 13-9. The Caxton Paper Mill, affected by the 1987 New Zealand
Earthquake, includes two large motor-generators. The M-G sets, which
consist of several generators arranged in series, generate de current to
power the paper machines. The units were undamaged by the earthquake.
13-14
10446175
This M-G set for the elevator at the Burbank Power Plant was undamaged by
the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake.
This M-G set damaged its anchorage during the 1978 Santa Barbara
Earthquake.
Figure 13-10. Small motor-generator sets at the Burbank Power Plant in

the San Fernando Valley (upper photograph) and at the University of
California, Santa Barbara (lower photograph).
13-15
10446175
9I-£I
e: ~ NUMBER OF MOTOR-GENERA TORS

~ ~ ~
~~ 0 U'l 0 U'l
-t>CD 0
§.... 1\l
C"'lW 0
.........
C"+l co
0 ....
:::3 •
0
-1'> en
CD
~ _.
""'SCD
0(")
cc-+
:::3CD
c..c.. "C
3 .....
m
)>
~~
-'·CD
0 :::3
"'
G)
ll
~
(.,)
0
:::3g- oco
-s c
)> '< Z
0
Mesa Substation
-'0
_. -1-> ~ SICARTSA Steel Mill
::;·s o
Vlc-+ m
c-+ o r
~-s
::;3- I
m
Jl
(") ~ )>
~ ~ CD
-1
-
0
•
;;5 ~ ~ ~ Caxton Paper Mill
c-+
Vl ....... co
co )>
-'""'S <
~ Vl m
:::3:E ll
~ ;::: ~ El Centro Steam Plant
~·=. m
:::3 ::J:
oc-+ 0
Vl ::r ll
~ : § 0 Dispatch Center
-1-) ~- ~ ~ Sylmar Converter Station
~~ )>co
:::3 .....
(")(")
r
.....
c-+
-'·CD
ox
:::3"0
CD
~-s
-s .....
CDCD
:::3
-'•C"'l
:::3CD
c..
..... c..
(") ~ 0
~c-+ en
~~ 0
C..t:r co
~
Vl
CD
10446175
Section 14
DISTRIBUTION PANELS
Electrical distribution panels are assemblies of molded case circuit breakers or

fused switches mounted in sheet metal cabinets. Their function is similar to
motor control centers and low voltage switchgear: to distribute low voltage ac
or de power from a main circuit to branch circuits, and to provide overcurrent
protection. Distribution panels typically serve ac power systems ranging up to
600 volts and de power systems ranging up to 250 volts. The equipment class of
distribution panels includes panelboards and switchboards.

Distribution panels contain circuit breakers or fusible switches mounted in
vertical stacks. A main circuit breaker typically controls power entering the
cabinet and provides overcurrent protection to the assembly of branch circuit
breakers. The branch circuit breakers are usually mounted in one or two columns
either above or below the main breaker. Two types of distribution panels are
found in power plant electrical systems: switchboards and panelboards. Although
switchboards and panelboards perform the same function, they differ in
construction and application. Switchboards are typically floor-mounted
assemblies, while panelboards are usually wall-mounted. Switchboards usually
distribute larger quantities of power than panelboards.
Switchboards
Distribution switchboards are free-standing cabinets containing stacks of circuit
breakers or fusible switches. Their construction is similar to motor control
centers in that they have assemblies of circuit breakers or switches mounted into
shelf-like cubicles. Electrical connections are normally routed through enclosed
cable compartments in the rear of the cabinet. A switchboard will sometimes
include a main circuit breaker and a power metering section mounted in separate
compartments within the cabinet (Figure 14-2). Switchboards are often
14-1
10446175
incorporated into substation assemblies that include motor control centers,
transformers, and switchgear (Figure 14-8).
In modern power plant applications, the completely enclosed (safety) switchboard

is almost exclusively used. These switchboards are constructed with welded steel
frames of angle or channel members, and are completely enclosed in a sheet metal
casing.
Panel boards
The National Electric Code (NEC) defines a panelboard as a panel which includes
buses, switches, and automatic protective devices designed for the control or
distribution of power circuits. Panelboards are placed in a cabinet or cutout
box which is mounted in or against a wall and accessible only from the front.
Figure 14-1 shows a typical distribution panelboard and identifies the basic
components. The assembly of circuit breakers contained in a panelboard is
normally bolted to a steel frame or chassis, which is in turn mounted to the rear
or sides of the panelboard enclosure. Individual circuit breakers are either
bolted or plugged into the steel chassis. A cable gutter typically runs along
the side of the circuit breaker chassis.
Cabinet Structure
Industry standards, such as those developed by Underwriter's Laboratory and the
National Electrical Manufacturer's Association (e.g., UL-508, NEMA ICS-6), are
maintained for the construction of distribution panel enclosures. These
standards determine the minimum structural framing and sheet metal thickness for
distribution panel enclosures as a function of sheet metal area between supports
or reinforcing.
Switchboard dimensions are standardized with individual sections ranging from 20

to 40 inches in depth and width. The height is generally 90 inches. Switchboard
sections can weigh up to 500 pounds:
Panelboards have a wide range of cabinet sizes. Typical dimensions for wall-
mounted units are 20 to 40 inches in height and width, and 6 to 12 inches in
depth. Weights for wall-mounted panelboards range from 30 to 200 pounds.
14-2
10446175
Equipment Anchorage
Distribution panel enclosures are typically anchored through mounting holes
provided in the cabinet frame. Free-standing switchboards are anchored using
either concrete expansion anchors routed through bolt holes in the cabinet frame,
or by welding the base frame members to steel plates embedded in the concrete
floor. Wall-mounted panelboards can be either bolted directly to the wall using
expansion anchors, or bolted to a Unistrut frame which is anchored to the wall.
Connecting conduit is typically attached to the wall using Unistrut brackets,
clamps, and wall anchors.
In industrial facilities, conventional power plants, and nuclear plants,
distribution panels are used to distribute low voltage ac or de power from a main
circuit to branch circuits, and to provide overcurrent protection. Examples of
nuclear plant distribution panels are presented in Figure 14-3.
14.2 DATA BASE REPRESENTATION FOR DISTRIBUTION PANELS

Figures 14-4 through 14-14 present examples of distribution panels within the
data base. The data base inventory of distribution panels includes about 100
the data base. Of this inventory, there are two sites that experienced
seismically induced damage to distribution panels.
Figure 14-15 presents a· bar chart that illustrates the inventory of distribution
panels at various data base sites as a function of their estimated peak ground
acceleration.
distribution panels are summarized below.
Distribution panels that are wall-mounted, free-standing, or included in

assemblies with switchgear or MCCs are represented in the data base. Panels
ranging in height from 24 to 90 inches are represented with conduit attached
either atop, or at the base of the cabinet.
14-3
10446175
• Circuit breaker
• Fusible switch
• Metering compartments
• Switchboard/panelboard enclosure and internals
• Attached conduit between the panel and the nearest building anchor
point

The station includes seven distribution panels (Figure 14-4). There are two
wall-mounted panelboards and four General Electric switchboards located in the
basement of the station. All distribution panels were undamaged by the
earthquake.
The plant includes six wall- and floor-mounted distribution panels manufactured
by Westinghouse and SquareD (Figure 14-5). All distribution panels were
of the 1983 swarm of Coalinga earthquakes. Strong-motion monitors are located in
the station switchyard, as well as in the basement, operating floor, and on the
14-4
10446175
The plant includes five floor-mounted switchboards manufactured by Dietz (Figure
14-6) and Westinghouse. The switcr~oards are located on the operating (ground)
floor adjacent to the main control panel. The distribution panels were undamaged
by the earthquake.
The Main Oil Pumoinq Plant, located near the epicenter of the initial shock in
much further from the fault. The duration of strong motion at the site was
The plant yard contains an assembly with two Westinghouse switchboards and a
motor control center section (Figure 14-7). Brackets are welded to the unit and
anchored with 1/2-inch expansion bolts. The distribution panels are contained
within an outer enclosure (for weather protection) and an inner enclosure. The
distribution panels were undamaged by the earthquake.

distribution panels. At two of these sites, the seismic effects resulted in a
loss of functionality.
At Devers Substation, affected by the 1986 North Palm Springs Earthquake, two
unanchored de distribution switchboards (Figure 14-11, lower photograph) slid
several inches, plowing vinyl floor tiles in their path. Components were not
damaged, and electrical connections to the cable spreading area beneath were not
damaged, in spite of the sliding of the cabinets.
At the Caxton Paper Mill, a wall-mounted distribution panel suffered an internal

short circuit during the 1987 New Zealand Earthquake (Figure 14-12). Apparently,
the internal bus bars were not positively attached. During the earthquake, the
loose bus bars contacted and shorted the unit. Plant operators suspected a
factory defective unit, since the unit was one of six new, identical units and
the other panels were not damaged.
14-5
10446175
At the Del Amo Substation, which experienced an estimated PGA of 0.20g during the
1987 Whittier Earthquake, a battery charger was tripped by the actuation of a
molded case circuit breaker in the associated distribution panel (Figure 14-13).
The distribution panel is a 110/220 volt dead front switchboard, manufactured by
Square D. The distribution panel is anchored with 1/2-inch bolts in the corners
of the cabinet, and the adjacent cabinets in the assembly are bolted together.
There is about 1/2-inch clearance between the panel and the adjacent wall. The
breaker actuation appears to be the result of the impact of the panel with the
wall.
At the California Federal Bank Computer Facility, which experienced a PGA in

excess of 0.40g during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake, a distribution panel was
damaged when its cables were disconnected. The panel is anchored with 1/2-inch
bolts and is located on the ground floor of the main building (Figure 14-14).
The distribution panel's power cables are attached to the internal bus bars
through a lug assembly. The cables run from the lug assembly through the base of
the panel into a conduit system buried in the ground. The conduit system
provides an electrical connection between the main building and an adjacent
building. There is virtually no slack in the cables as they enter the conduit.
During the earthquake, the cables were pulled from their connections, resulting
in damage to the bus bars and the lug assembly. It appears that the differential
movement between the two buildings pulled the cable sufficiently to disconnect
them from the distribution panel. Other components of the panel were undamaged.
Instances of seismically induced damage to distribution panels are known to have

Seismic damage to distribution panels from inadequate anchorage has occurred at

several sites, including those affected by the 1964 Anchorage, Alaska Earthquake
(including Anchorage Municipal Light and Power Plant), and the 1971 San Fernando
Earthquake (including Olive View Medical Center).

The seismic experience data base indicates that distribution panels possess
14-6
10446175
for distribution panels.
• Anchorage. Distribution panels that are unanchored or poorly

anchored have slid at several data base sites.
• Molded Case Circuit Breakers. At one data base site, the
inadvertent actuation of a molded case circuit breaker interrupted
power to a battery charger.
14.5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Underwriter's Laboratory. 1980. "Standards for Safety: Industrial
Control Equipment." Standard UL-508.
2. National Electrical Manufacturer's Association. 1983. "Enclosure for
Industrial Controls and Systems." Standard ICS-6.
3. McPartland, J. F. and W. J. Novak. n.d. Electrical Equipment Manual. 3rd
Ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
4. "Switchboards and Panelboards." June 1965. Power. Special Report: 38-
40.
5. IEEE Power Engineering Society, Power Generation Committee. 1973. "IEEE
Trial-Use Guide for Class IE Control Switchboards for Nuclear Power
Generating Stations." ANSI/IEEE Standard 420.
6. O'Connor, J. J. n.d. "Electronic Instrumentation and Control in Hazardous
Areas." Power.
7. Underwriter's Laboratory. 1983. "Standards for Dead-Front Switchboards."
Standard UL-891.
8. Square D Company. n.d. "Omegapak Type PT, 1-5 Horsepower Adjustable
Frequency Controllers."
9. Square D Company. n.d. "Omegapak Class 8804, 50-125 Horsepower Adjustable
Frequency Controllers."
10. Square D Company. n.d. "QO Circuit Breaker Load Centers with Convertible
Mains."
11. Square D Company. n.d. "Enclosures From Industrial Circuit Breakers."
12. Square D Company. n.d. "Power-Style Service Section Switchboards."
13. Square D Company. n.d. "Speed-D Transition Section."
14. Square D Company. n.d. "Motor Control Centers Switchboards and
Panelboards for Utilities."
15. SquareD Company. n.d. "Service Section Switchboards for Off-The-Shelf
Versatility."
14-7
10446175
16. Square D Company. n.d. "Class 2720 Speed-D Switchboards."
17. SquareD Company. n.d. "Type MCDO Power-Style Switchboards."
18. Square D Company. n.d. "Class 2760, Power-Style Multi-Section
Switchboards."
19. SquareD Company. n.d. "NEHB Circuit Breaker Panelboards."
20. Square D Company. n.d. "QMB Panelboards and Switchboards, 200,000A Short
Circuit Rating."
21. Federal Pacific Electric Company. n.d. "Class 2110, Distribution Type
Switchboards."
22. Federal Pacific Electric Company. n.d. "Type NDP 240V, Type NHDP 480V,
Circuit Breaker Panelboard."
23. Ramsey Controls Inc. n.d. "Ramsey XL ac Drives."
14-8
10446175
Sheet Metal Enclosure
Door Panel
Vertical Columns
of Molded-Case
Circuit Breakers
Courtesy Federal Pacific Company
Figure 14-1. Basic components of a typical distribution panel.
14-9
10446175
Sheet Metal Cladding
Incoming Main Lugs
Metering Compartment
Main Molded Case Circuit Breaker
Plug-In Circuit Breaker Locations
Distribution Bus Panel
Neutral Lug Assembly
Frame Constructed of Welded

Steel Channels and Angles
Courtesy Square D Company
Figure 14-2. Typical internal components within a distribution panel.
14-10
10446175
Figure 14-3. Distribution panels in nuclear plant applications.
10446175
14-11
.1 run
•
The station includes two wall-mounted panelboards.
There are three General Electric

open-face switchboards located
in the basement of the station.
Figure 14-4. Distribution panels at the Sylmar Converter Station,

affected by the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake.
10446175
14-12
Figure 14-5. El Centro Steam Plant contains six distribution panels
manufactured by Westinghouse and Square D. In most cases, steel channels
are bolted to the rear of the panel. The cabinet is cantilevered from a
nearby column where the channels are welded to mounting brackets.
14-13
10446175
Figure 14-6. The Pleasant Valley Pumping Plant includes five distribution
switchboards. The units are anchored with four 3/4-inch bolts.
14-14
10446175
Figure 14-7. Westinghouse distribution panels at the Main Oil Pumping
Plant are mounted in an outdoor enclosure with a motor control center.
The enclosure is anchored with four 1/2-inch bolts.
14-15
10446175
This distribution panel
at the Kettleman
Compressor Station is
incorporated into a
motor control center.
At the Goleta Substation,

several distribution
switchboards are bolted together
to form a single assembly.
Figure 14-8. Distribution panels are often incorporated into assemblies

that include motor control centers, transformers, and
switchgear.
10446175
14-16
Figure 14-9. Distribution panels at the Metcalf Substation (upper
photograph) and at Evergreen College (lower photograph). The units were
undamaged by the 1984 Morgan Hill Earthquake.
10446175
14-17
Figure 14-10. Distribution panels at the Adak Naval Station. The units
were undamaged by the 1986 Adak, Alaska Earthquake.
14-18
10446175
Figure 14-11. Distributjon panels at the Devers Substation, affected by
the 1986 North Palm Springs Earthquake. The panel in the lower photograph
was unanchored and slid during the earthquake. There was no damage to
distribution panels by the 1986 earthquake.
14-19
10446175
Figure 14-12. At the Caxton Paper Mill, a wall-mounted distribution panel
(right unit only) sustained an internal short circuit during the 1987 New
Zealand Earthquake. Plant operators suspected a factory defective unit,
since the panel was one of six new, identical units.
14-20
10446175
Figure 14-13. At the De] Amo Substation, a circuit breaker on a
distribution panel (arrow, left photograph) actuated during the 1987
Whittier Earthquake. The cause of the breaker actuation appeared to be
the impact of the panel with an adjacent wall.
14-21
10446175
Figure 14-14. At the California Federal Bank Computer Facility, a
distribution panel (similar to the unit shown in the lower photograph) was
damaged when its cables disconnected during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake.
The cables run from the panel, through a lug assembly (arrow, upper
photograph following removal from cabinet), into a conduit system which
serv~s the adjacent building. There is virtually no slack in the cables
as they enter the conduit. It appears that differential movement between
the two buildings pulled the cables sufficiently to disconnect them from
the distribution panel.
14-22
10446175
* At the Caxton Paper MI. a wal-moulted <Mtri>ution panel auffered an
ntemal short clrcUI .
15 ** At the Cal Fed Facllly. power cables were pUled from the base of a
dsb1bullon panel.
lllJI-dcates a damaged llllt .

cnl
a:
VI
....1
w
z
c:
0 -~
a: 5
c (I)
<
a.
z 10 c
~
(;)
l5
-tc ~<I) -
~
en
E
1U
(I)
....
t-
i5
-
~(;) ....(I)
a:nl
(/)
~
0 (/)
i= <I)
1U
~ i
;:::)
Ill Cl 3::
- ....a: ~0
c: >- - .... Cl)
5l
0 -~
E
'ai
~ c:
n!l}
~ VI ~ ~
I
N c ·oal ~ >-
-en <5c: .Q
1U
w cnl ~ w
I
LL LL ·a;
0
a: >
nl
-~ .c
a: al
cal
:::::JE
1U as
w 5 iii <I)
~ Cl)
Ill -~ J:
w Cl)
-9 ~
~ 0
al en
;:::)
z en £ .ac: ~
=
0
0
0.20g 0.30g 0.40g 0.50g 0.60g 0.80g 0.90g
IN·DIS·P 40010.04 SQUG-20 CLASSES PEAK GROUND ACCELERATION (AVERAGE HORIZONTAL)
Figure 14-15. Selected inventory of distribution panels within the seismic experience data
indicated.
10446175
10446175
Section 15
BATTERIES AND RACKS
This class of equipment includes both storage batteries and their supporting
structures. Most battery systems in power plants include lead-acid storage
batteries mounted in series on steel-frame or wooden racks. These storage
battery systems are always equipped with a charger, and in most modern large
power stations, an inverter, for use as an uninterruptible power supply. Battery
chargers· and inverters are addressed as a separate equipment class.

Batteries
A battery is a group of electro-chemical cells interconnected to supply a
specified voltage of de power. The voltage of a battery is determined by the
number of cells linked in series. Each cell of a typical battery produces a
nominal 2 volts of de power. A 12 volt battery, therefore, contains 6 cells.
Lead-acid storage batteries are the most prevalent type of battery in power
plants and are the subject of this equipment class. The basic components of a
lead-acid battery cell (Figure 15-1) are the following:
• Element - An assembly of positive and negative plates, insulated

from each other by separators.
• Cell Cover - A molded plastic cover through which the positive and
negative posts protrude.
• Cell Jar - A transparent impact-resistant plastic or glass
container which houses the element and electrolyte.
• Electrolyte -A liquid solution of dilute sulfuric acid in which
the element is immersed.
• Flame Arrestor - A vent system which protects the battery against
ignition of internal gases by external flame or sparks.
15-1
10446175
The electrode elements are the key components of the battery system. Each plate
consists of a rigid lead alloy grid that provides physical support for relatively
porous, active materials. Reaction of the electrolyte and active materials
creates a current flow when a load is imposed on the cell.
There are four basic types of lead-acid storage batteries which are distinguished
by the construction of their positive plates. These four types are:
• Calcium or Cadmium Flat Plate

• Plante or Manchex
• Antimony Flat Plate
• Tubular
The data base includes many examples of calcium or cadmium flat plate and Manchex
batteries. There are very few examples of antimony flat plate and tubular
batteries. Antimony flat plate and tubular batteries will therefore be excluded
from the equipment class.
Flat plate battery designs utilize a flat lattice grid for the positive and
negative plates (Figure 15-2). These grids are cast of either a calcium or
cadmium alloy, which is needed to strengthen the basic lead content of the grid.
These flat plates hold a paste which is the active ingredient enabling the
storage of electrical energy. Lead oxide is used on the positive lattice grid
and sponge lead is used on the negative lattice grid.
The Plante or Manchex battery is one of the older designs of batteries that still
has limited use in the power industry. The basic construction of the Plante
battery includes a very heavy lead plate, with either a series of horizontal
cross-ribs attached to the plate (Plante plate design), or a matrix of spiral
buttons inserted into the plate (Manchex design- Figure 15-2). Plante battery
designs have lives of up to 25 years or more in heavy-duty applications.
A battery is rated by its capacity to deliver a certain current over a certain

time period while maintaining voltage above a specified level. Battery capacity
is normally measured in ampere-hours. Most batteries are rated by the amount of
time they can deliver a specified current, prior to discharging to less than 1.75
volts per cell. The capacity of the battery is determined by its size, and other
15-2
10446175
factors, such as· temperature, amount of charge, and battery age. Individual
battery weights typically range from about 50 to 500 pounds.
Racks
The cells that make up the stationary lead-acid battery system are mounted on a
rack specifically constructed for this purpose. These battery racks are normally
frames of steel channels, angles, and struts that support the batteries above the
floor. Racks can be multi-rowed, multi-tiered or multi-stepped (Figure 15-3).
Multi-rowed racks are adjacent rows of batteries all at the same level. Multi-
tiered racks are vertical rows of batteries mounted directly above each other.
Multi-stepped racks have each succeeding row of batteries located above and to
the rear of the previous row.
The shelf that supports the batteries typically consists of steel channels
running longitudinally that are in turn supported by transverse rectangular
frames of steel angles. The racks are usually braced by diagonal struts along
either the front or rear face for longitudinal support. The rack members are
connected by a combination of welds and bolts.
Well-designed battery racks include a restraining rail running longitudinally

along the front and the rear of the row of batteries and wrapping around the ends
of the row. These rails are located at about mid-height of the battery, and are
designed to prevent accidental overturning of the batteries in the event of an
impact. In areas of high seismicity, they also resist the overturning of
batteries in earthquakes.
Equipment Anchorage
Battery racks are typically secured to the floor with concrete expansion anchors.
The bolt pattern and sizes are usually specified by the battery manufacturer,
depending on the application and the facility location. Typical anchorage of
battery racks utilizes two 1/2-inch expansion anchors per battery rack support.

Stationary battery systems provide a steady source of de power, as well as an
instant reliable source of emergency power over a limited period of time. The
primary users of stationary lead-acid battery systems include power plants (both
15-3
10446175
nuclear and fossil-fueled stations), telephone systems, hospitals, airports, data
processing facilities, industrial manufacturing plants, and other facilities that
place a critical reliance on power continuity. When coupled with a dc-to-ac
inverter, stationary battery systems provide an instant emergency supply of ac
power for critical circuits. Some of the more important applications for the
stationary battery systems include:
1. The absorption of electrical voltage spikes by the battery system

before they reach critical equipment.
2. Use as an emergency power source during the interruption of a
primary power supply, enabling selected loads to continue operating
for a specified time period.
3. Use as a power "bridge" for lengthy periods after an outage of
primary power, providing uninterrupted de power during the time
required to switch from the primary power source to the alternate
power source. Alternate sources of power include standby utility
power circuits from another substation or an on-site standby
generator set.

Battery racks are used in nuclear plants to supply de power for circuits in
control and instrumentation systems, to power de starter motors for emergency
engine-generators, and to provide de power to inverters for uninterruptible power
systems. Batteries and their supporting racks in nuclear plants are, in general,
the same type, size, and construction as those included in the data base. Figure
15-4 shows typical nuclear plant batteries.
15.2 DATA BASE REPRESENTATION FOR BATTERIES AND RACKS

Figures 15-5 through 15-17 present examples of battery racks within the data
base. The data base inventory of battery racks includes about 120 examples,
base. Of this inventory, there are four instances of loss of function following
an earthquake. There are two examples of unrestrained batteries being rendered
inoperable after toppling from their supporting rack, one instance where an
unreinforced masonry wall collapsed on a battery rack, and one instance where the
manufacturer attributed the loss of function to age.
Figure 15-18 presents a bar chart that illustrates the inventory of battery racks
15-4
10446175
batteries and racks are summarized below.
Batteries normally have a service life of up to 25 years. In most of the data

base facilities, individual battery cells are replaced only when periodic testing
finds them to be faulty. In the older data base facilities (e.g., Valley,
Burbank, and Glendale Power Plants; El Centro, and Drop IV Plants; Humboldt Bay
Plant; Kettleman Compressor Station; and Renca Plant in Chile), some batteries
were apparently up to 20 years old at the time of their earthquake.
Data base representation for batteries includes calcium and cadmium flat plate
and Plante (Manchex) type batteries with weights ranging from 50 to 1000 pounds.
The experience data base includes representation of both steel and wood racks in
configurations ranging up to two tiers or three steps. Representation is
provided for racks both with and without wraparound bracing, and with and without
diagonal bracing. Although some form of spacers are usually provided between
batteries, there are cases in the data base of missing or inadequately installed
spacers.
Data base representation for battery rack anchorage ranges from unanchored racks
to racks with two 5/8-inch bolts per supporting leg.
• The battery including the cell jar and enclosed plates

• Supporting rack
• Electrical connections between batteries (bus bar)
• Attached electrical cable

15-5
10446175
The station control building is a three~story steel-frame structure. Five
battery racks ·are located in the station basement (Figure 15-5). The racks are
double- and triple-stepped configurations. One configuration consists of two
double-stepped racks mounted back-to-back for a total of four rows of batteries
(Figure 15-5, upper photograph). The racks are constructed of steel angles and
Unistrut, joined by a combination of welded and bolted connections. They include
Unistrut rails that form wraparound restraints for each row of batteries. The
racks are anchored to embedded steel plates with 1/2-inch (est.) bolts, with two
bolts per rack support.
The batteries and their supporting racks were undamaged in the 1971 San Fernando
Earthquake.
Earthquake. The duration of motion at the site is estimated at about 15 seconds.
The site ground motion is based on measurements by an instrument located less
than 1/2 mile from the plant.
The plant includes four battery racks located on the operating floor (second
floor above grade) of the concrete shear wall turbine building (Figure 15-6).
Two of the racks are double-stepped steel frames (Figure 15-6, upper photograph),
consisting of steel angles and Unistrut with bolted and welded connections. The
other configuration consists of two double-stepped racks joined back-to-back for
a total of four rows of batteries (Figure 15-6 lower photograph). This
configuration is constructed of steel angle supports with wooden 2x4 beams
supporting the batteries. Battery racks are anchored with 1/2-inch (est.)
expansion bolts, two per rack support.
The batteries and their supporting racks were undamaged in the 1979 Imperial
Valley Earthquake.
in the station switchyard as well as in the basement, operating floor and on the
recorded an average horizontal PGA of 0.56g with about 15 seconds of strong
motion.
15-6
10446175
The plant includes three double-stepped steel racks located on the ground floor
(Figure 15-7). The racks are constructed of steel angles and Unistrut joined by
a combination of welds and bolts. They include wraparound restraints and
diagonal bracing along the rear face of the racks. The batteries are separated
by foam spacers. The batteries and their supporting rack were undamaged in the
earthquake.
The Devers Substation recorded an average horizontal PGA of 0.85g, with a

duration of about six seconds, during the 1986 North Palm Springs Earthquake.
The site experienced from two to five times more motion than its design basis,
resulting in extensive damage to switchyard equipment.
The substation control building is a one-story reinforced concrete-block

structure with a wood diaphragm roof. A two-step rack containing Exide calcium
flat plate batteries supplies emergency de power to the station. The rack is
constructed of steel channel shelves on steel angle supports with wood
restraining rails (Figure 15-8, upper photograph). During the earthquake, one
row of batteries shifted several inches along the rack. In spite of their
movement, the batteries and their interconnecting bus bars were not damaged, and
the de power supply operated properly after the earthquake. A similarly
constructed battery rack is located in the 500 kV relay house (Figure 15-8, lower
photograph). The wraparound bracing allows no excess space at the end of the
row. The batteries did not slide in the rack and were not damaged by the
earthquake.
The Edgecumbe Substation is located within one mile of the main surface scarp of
the 1987 New Zealand Earthquake. The substation experienced an estimated average
horizontal PGA of 0.50g, with a strong-motion duration of about 10 seconds.
The substation control house is a one-story concrete building with an attached

concrete high-bay shop area. Three wood battery racks are housed in the control
building (Figure 15-9). One set of batteries, manufactured by Chloride, is
supported on a two-tier rack with wood wraparound bracing and spacers. Two other
sets of Chloride batteries are supported on single-step racks with wood
wraparound bracing and no spacers. A fourth set of batteries is located in an
outdoor enclosure in the switchyard. All batteries were undamaged during the
1987 earthquake.
15-7
10446175
The experience data base includes four sites where seismic damage to batteries
resulted in a loss of function. At two sites damage was the result of batteries
falling from their supporting racks due to lack of wraparound bracing. One such
instance occurred with a small rack in the Main Oil Pumping Plant during the
Coalinga earthquake. The rack of batteries had no restraint against overturning,
and the plant uninterruptible power system was lost when the batteries
overturned.
Similar damage occurred at the Soyapango Substation in San Salvador where five
unrestrained batteries fell off their racks and were damaged. In addition,
spacers were not provided between the cells and during the earthquake they
shifted, distorting but not damaging bus bars {Figure
15-16).
Another instance of seismic damage to batteries resulting in loss of function

occurred at the SICARTSA Steel Mill, affected by the 1985 Mexico Earthquake. At
the steel mill's Administrative Building, batteries were damaged when an
unreinforced clay tile masonry wall collapsed on them.
The fourth instance of seismic damage to batteries that resulted in loss of

function occurred at the Kawerau Substation, affected by the 1987 New Zealand
Earthquake. Five cells on a two-tier battery rack would not operate following
the earthquake. The cells were Chloride, flat-plate batteries and weighed about
40 pounds each {Figure 15-17). Gaps between the individual cells allowed the
cells to rock and pound during the earthquake. Loss of voltage was caused by the
dislodging of the positive plates within the battery jars. The manufacturer
attributed the damage to deterioration with age; the batteries were 8 years old
at the time of the earthquake.
Non-damaging seismic effects to batteries in the experience data base are

described below.
At the Rapel Hydroelectric Plant, affected by the 1985 Chile Earthquake, there
are two instances of differential rocking between batteries causing a flexible
bus strap to buckle on the upper tier of a two-tiered rack. The operability of
the batteries was not impaired. The rack contained small spacers between
15-8
10446175
batteries, but the spacers slipped out during the earthquake, allowing
differential displacement between batteries.
Other instances of distorted bus bars caused by lack of or insufficient spacers

occurred at the San Isidro Substation in Chile, Devers Substation in North Palm
Springs, and the Whitewater Hydroelectric Plant in North Palm Springs. In all
cases, the batteries remained functional following the earthquake.
Instances of seismically induced damage to batteries and racks are known to have
These sites are not included in the data base and few details about the instances
A battery rack was damaged at the Olive View Sanatorium in the San Fernando
Earthquake. Here, the battery rack included restraining bracing; however, the
bracing was attached to the adjacent wall through a weak anchorage. Damage to
this anchorage caused the battery rack to overturn.
At two substations, affected by the 1933 Long Beach Earthquake, rigidly fastened
connections (cables) to storage batteries were pulled loose by the earthquake,
damaging the end cells of the batteries. Further information is not available.
At the Elmendorf Air Force Base Communications Building, affected by the 1964
Anchorage, Alaska Earthquake, a three-tier rack supporting 72 large batteries
(approximately 22,000 pounds) collapsed. The rack was designed for gravitational
loads only, with no diagonal bracing, and was unable to resist the lateral loads
caused by the earthquake.
Seismic damage to battery racks from inadequate anchorage, inadequate wraparound

bracing, or lack of spacers has occurred at several sites, including those
affected by the 1952 Kern County Earthquake (including Bealville Relay Houses),
the 1964 Anchorage, Alaska Earthquake (including Eklutna Power Plant), the 1968
Inangahua, New Zealand Earthquake (including Inangahua Substation), the 1972
Managua Earthquake (including ENALUF Power Plant), the 1976 Friuli, Italy
Earthquake (including the Compagnola Hydroelectric Plant), and the 1976 Kyzyl-
Kum, Soviet Union Earthquake (including Gazly Gas Field).
15-9
10446175
The seismic experience data base indicates that batteries and racks possess
characteristics which generally preclude damage in earthquakes, as long as
adequate provisions are made in the supporting racks. Instances of seismic
effects to battery racks have demonstrated tendencies for damage in certain
situations. For example, individual batteries, which are not secured with
wraparound bracing and spacers to hold them snugly in their rack, have fallen or
bent their bus bars during earthquakes.
15.5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. "Emergency Power Systems." June 1978. Specifying Engineer.
2. Plankenhorn, J. May 1982. "Batteries for Emergency Power and Lighting."
Specifying Engineer.
3. Exide Corporation. n.d. "Stationary Lead-Acid Battery Systems."
4. Gould, Inc. n.d. "Stationary Battery Racks."
5. Senderoff, S. n.d. "Batteries." Chemical Fuels Technology.
6. "New Developments in Lead-Acid Batteries." October 1983. Power
Engineering.
7. Plankenhorn, J. August 1979. "Standby Power Batteries, Chargers."
Specifying Engineer.
8. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. February 1978. "Maintenance, Testing,
and Replacement of Large Lead Storage Batteries." Regulatory Guide 1.129.
9. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. October 1978. "Design and
Installation of Large Lead Storage Batteries for Nuclear Power Plants."
Regulatory Guide 1.128.
15-10
10446175
Cell Cover Molded
from. Opaque Sryrene
Acrilonitrile (SAN) Vent Plug
Electrolyte Level
Indicating Marks
Cell Jar of Transparent
Styrene Acrilonitrile
Double Separation
of Microporous
PVC and Glass Wool
Electrolyte
Element
High Conductivity
Plate Connectors
and Terminal Pillars
Positive Plate of
Lead Selenium Alloy
Matched Negative Plate
Courtesy Chloride, Ltd.
Figure 15-1. Components of a typical lead-acid battery cell.
15-11
10446175
Flat Plate
Mane hex
Courtesy Exide Battery
Figure 15-2. Typical examples of flat plate and Manchex batteries.
15-12
10446175
2 Tier
2 Step
3 Step
Figure 15-3. Stationary~battery rack configurations (lateral restraints

not shown).
15-13
10446175
Figure 15-4. Typical battery racks used in nuclear plant applications.
15-14
10446175
Figure 15-5. The Sylmar Converter Station includes five steel battery
racks located in the basement. The racks are constructed with a
combination of steel angles and Unistrut, joined by a combination of
bolted and welded connections. They 1nclude wraparound restraints and
diagonal bracing along the rear face of the rack. The batteries are not
separated by spacers.
15-15
10446175
A double-stepped steel rack on the operating floor of the turbine building
(second floor above grade) serves Units 3 and 4. The rack consists of
steel angles and Unistrut joined by welded and bolted connections. The
rack includes wraparound restraints and diagonal bracing along the rear
face. Foam spacers separate the batteries.
Units 1 and 2 are served by a wood and steel rack located on the
operating floor. The rack includes four rows of batteries arranged in a
back-to-back double-stepped configuration. The batteries rest on 2"x4"
wooden beams bolted to a steel angle support frame. Wooden overturning
restraints (2"x2") run along the front and rear face of each row of
batteries. Diagonal braces are provided along the longitudinal
centerline of the rack. The batteries are not separated by spacers.
Figure 15-6. Battery racks at El Centro Steam Plant.

15-16
10446175
The plant includes three double-stepped steel racks located on the ground
floor. The racks are constructed of steel angles and Unistrut joined by a
combination of welds and bolts. They include wraparound restraints and
diagonal bracing along the rear face of the rack. The batteries are
separated by foam spacers.
Anchorage for the racks consists of two 1/2-inch expansion anchors into
the concrete floor for each of the two rack supports. This type of
anchorage is typical for the data base.
Figure 15-7. Battery racks at the Pleasant Valley Pumping Plant.
15-17
10446175
Figure 15-8. Devers Substation includes two battery racks. The batteries
were undamaged by the 1986 North Palm Springs Earthquake.
15-18
10446175
Figure 15-9. The Edgecumbe Substation, which experienced an estimated PGA
of 0.50g during the 1987 New Zealand Earthquake, includes four wooden
battery racks (three are shown above). The batteries were undamaged by
the earthquake.
10446175
15-19
Figure 15-10. Two-step steel battery racks at the Burbank Power Plant
(upper photograph) and at the Glendale Power Plant (lower photograph);
both facilities are located in the San Fernando Valley.
15-20
10446175
Figure 15-11. Two-step steel battery racks in the near-field area of the
1985 Chile Earthquake include examples with diagonal and wraparound
bracing (Las Ventanas Power Plant - upper photograph}, as well as cases
where no bracing is provided (Laguna Verde Power Plant - lower
photograph}. In both cases, batteries were undamaged by the earthquake.
15-21
10446175
Figure 15-12. Batteries on wooden racks at Power Plant Number 3 on Adak
Naval Station. The batteries have no wraparound restraints and no
spacers.
15-22
10446175
Figure 15-13. Examples of well-constructed wooden battery racks are found
at the Center Substation, affected by the 1987 Whittier Earthquake. The
lower photograph shows details of the rack construction, consisting of
wooden runners bolted to supporting steel angles, which are anchored to
the floor with 1/2-inch expansion bolts.
15-23
10446175
Figure 15-14. The heavy construction of recent vintage battery racks is
illustrated by two-tiered racks at the California Federal Savings Data
Processing Center (upper photograph), and the Light-Hype Substation (lower
photograph), affected by the 1987 Whittier Earthquake. The steel racks
are supported on a "wishbone" frame of steel channels welded to embedded
steel in the floor. Unistrut shelves and restraining bracing support the
batteries.
15-24
10446175
II
I
I
Figure 15-15. The Pacific Bell facilities, affected by the 1987 Whittier
Earthquake, illustrate the size of batteries typically found in the de
power supplies for telephone systems. The upper photograph shows a two-
tier rack of Exide lead-calcium cells, weighing about 450 pounds each.
The lower photograph shows a floor-mounted array of lead-antimony
"submarine" batteries, each cell weighing over 1000 pounds.
15-25
10446175
During the earthquake,
five unrestrained
batteries (shown
between the arrows}
fell from the rack and
had to be replaced.
Due to lack of spacers, several batteries shifted during the earthquake

and distorted bus bars.
Figure 15-16. Batteries on racks at the Soyapango Substation affected by

the 1986 San Salvador Earthquake.
15-26
10446175
Figure 15-17. The single instance of internal failure within batteries
occurred at the Kawerau Substation in the 1987 Bay of Plenty Earthquake in
New Zealand. Several of the lead selenium flat plate batteries on the
upper shelf of the wooden two-tier rack suffered a loss in supply voltage
due to dislodging of their anode plates. The lack of spacers between
individual batteries may have contributed to the damage, since the
batteries were unrestrained from rattling within the rack during the
earthquake.
15-27
10446175
SZ-SI
NUMBER OF BATTERIES AND RACKS

0 (11 ... ...
?1\)
0 ~~~~~ Ormond Beach Power Plant
co Gates Substation, Kettleman Compressor Station
-'• C"' ""T1 Las Ventanas Power Plant. Las Condes Hospital
::::3 s::u ....
C. VH.C Adak Naval Station
-'•nl s:::
(") ""'l
S::US::Unl
<-+ Ill
(t) ...... Glendale Power Plant
c.s::uc.n
0 I
0 Drop IV Hydro Plant
"""' ......
S:::CIO (,.) Laguna Verde Power Plant
::::3• 0
(")
<-+ co Burbark Power Plant
.... Vl
Oct) Metcalf Substation
::::3 __,
(t)
on ,,,,,,,,,,, Mesa. Center. Lighthype Substations
"""' (t)
<-+
tO c.
""'l
0 ....
S:::::::3
::::3< 0
C.nl
::::3 ~ Y Qll'tJ \ ..HQ'QIII r IQI II.
3<-+
L~~''''ll''''''ll'''''~~~~~~~~~~~a~;~~~ir~~~~~!!~
"'C 0
00
<"+""'!
m co
)>
-'·'<
0
::::30 "' ~ Cal Fed Facility\ Wells Fargo Computer Center
)>S::U
"""'
0'" "c
::D
0
__, <-+
__, <-+ z
(t) 0
-'·""'! )>
::::3 .... 0
VI (t) 0
t"+VI 0 (11
s::u m 0
::::3S::U
(") ::::3
.... co
m
nlC. ::D
VI
""'l )>
l:,d&il ~ : : *
""'lS::U -i
(t) (")
0>7' 0
S:::Vl
__, z
....... ~ c;;!:~;!:i;!:~;!:
<-+:E
...... -'•
::::3<-+
)>
<
ptklliklli Pleasant Valley Pumping Station g:: ~i'ii'
-~ ilai'"'f(/)3go~;::
.... ....
m
~~ ~~ ~ !i ~Q
tO :::r I» ; 0 '< ;
0
::D
!·i
;:::, )> 0) a>cgGO"'.;i!!;f
::::3 0
~ !(/) 1~ ~0
Onl
Ill
<-+
__, ::r
"
m co
:I:
fill§lliiliilillil San Isidro Substation
~ ~s~~. ~-.,
8' ... Jl
VIII> 0
::D
:. ~ §' ?.
~ ~
(t)
0 .... "' g
-t,Vl N g- } ~ ""
3 0 Olinda Substation ~ 01 ~ ;.
-1> ....
S:::(")
z ~i 91"' ~ :!
-i <I" 0
::::3
(")(t) )>
.... ., i.. i ~
<-+X
-'•"'0
...... 0 a"'c. '& -a.ar ~=~-
~
Onl
...
::::3""'!
CXI
0 ~ ;. ~
I).J(t)
""'!::::3
co
~a i ~ 9c
~ ~
(t)(")
(t)
p]ill]ill]JiliJBl Devers Substation

..~ ~~ .~ .. CD
S"
c.
s::u s Q' '§. ~
<-+ !il- ~ ~ s.
s::u l!l c. ~
~ l!l t
] '<
0
co
0
co
10446175
Section 16
BATTERY CHARGERS AND INVERTERS
This class of equipment includes solid-state battery chargers and inverters.

Battery chargers and inverters perform similar functions, contain similar
components, and are packaged in similar cabinets. IEEE Standard 650-1979 groups
these two components together for Class IE qualification purposes due to their
inherent similarity. Although inverters and battery chargers perform
electrically inverse functions, they are physically very similar and will be
treated in the same class.

Battery chargers are assemblies of electronic components whose function is to
convert ac input into de output. Inverters are assemblies of similar electronic
components whose function is to convert de input into ac output. Battery
chargers and inverters are normally housed in floor- or wall-mounted cabinets.
Battery Chargers
The primary electrical function of a battery charger (i.e., production of direct
current by means of an alternating voltage) is accomplished using a rectifier.
Traditionally, many kinds of rectifiers have been used for battery charging,
including rotary converters, mercury-arc rectifiers, and thermionic valves. Most
modern battery chargers are based on solid-state rectifiers consisting of
semiconductors of selenium, germanium, or silicon diodes. Solid-state battery
chargers have substantial representation in the data base and are the focus of
this equipment class. Rotary type chargers and inverters are represented in the
equipment class of Motor Generators.
The primary components of battery chargers include solid-state diodes,

transformer coils, capacitors, electronic filters, and resistors. In addition,
the primary components are usually protected from electrical faults by molded
case circuit breakers and fuses. The internal components are normally bolted
16-1
10446175
either to the rear panel or walls of the cabinet, or to interior panels or steel
frames mounted within the cabinet. The front panel of the cabinet typically
contains instrumentation and controls, including ammeters, voltmeters, switches,
alarms, and control relays. Figure 16-1 shows the arrangement of components
within a typical wall-mounted battery charger.
Inverters
Inverters perform the opposite function of battery chargers; they change de into
ac power. The primary components of an inverter are similar to those of a
battery charger except that inverters use a solid-state thyristor (or silicon
controlled rectifier) instead of a diode, and have a commutation control circuit
which activates the thyristor in converting de voltage into positive and negative
half-cycles. Virtually all inverters used in power plant applications are
designed using solid-state components. Figure 16-2 shows a typical arrangement
of components in an inverter.
Battery Charger and Inverter Characteristics

Battery chargers and inverters are typically mounted in separate cabinets. For
applications sized for the same power system, the overall dimensions and weight
of chargers and inverters are usually similar. Some manufacturers supply the
battery charger and inverter as an assembly of two adjoining cabinets.
Battery chargers and inverters cover a range of sizes and capacities. The
smallest units are wall-mounted or rack-mounted with typical dimensions of 10 to
20 inches in height, width, and depth, and typical weights of 50 to 200 pounds.
Typical wall-mounted and rack-mounted units are shown in Figure 16-5 (lower
photograph) and Figure ·16-4 (lower photograph), respectively. Most power plant
applications require larger, floor-mounted units, as shown in Figure 16-5 (upper
photograph) and Figure 16-7. Typical cabinet dimensions are 20 to 40 inches in
width and depth, and 60 to 80 inches in height. The weights of the floor-mounted
chargers and inverters range from several hundred to several thousand pounds,
depending on the power requirements of the system they serve.
Typical ac voltages to battery chargers and from inverters range from 120 to 480
volts. Voltages in de power typically range from 24 to 240 volts.
16-2
10446175
Industry standards are maintained for the construction of cabinets by
Underwriter's Laboratory Standard (e.g., UL-1236 1984) and the National
Electrical Manufacturer's Association (e.g., NEMA Standard ICS-6 1978). These
standards determine the minimum structural framing and sheet metal thickness for
charger and inverter cabinetry as a function of size.
Equipment Anchorage
Floor-mounted cabinets typically rest on base channels. Holes are normally
provided in the bottom flange of the base channel for embedded bolts or expansion
anchors into the concrete floor. Alternately, the cabinet may be welded to
embedded steel, either by puddle welds through the bolt holes or tack welds along
the periphery of the base channels.
Wall- or rack-mounted units are normally anchored by bolts through the rear panel
of the cabinet. If the unit is attached directly to a concrete wall, expansion
anchors are normally used. Rack-mounted units are typically anchored by threaded
connections such as the manufacturer's standard spring-supported nut into a
Unistrut member.

The most common applications for both battery chargers and inverters are as
components of an uninterruptible power supply (UPS). ·UPS sy~tems are used
extensively to supply high quality power to equipment such as programmable
control systems or computers. A typical UPS consists of a solid-state inverter,
a battery charger, a set of lead-acid storage batteries, and an automatic
transfer switch. These components effectively isolate critical loads from all
types of power perturbations, including line transients, voltage fluctuations,
and loss of normal off-site power.
In the normal mode, a UPS battery charger is powered from an off-site ac power
line. It provides regulated de output to the inverter, while simultaneously
float-charging the battery. This system acts as a buffer to critical systems,
isolating them from voltage transients and frequency fluctuations. The inverter
then supplies a steady flow of ac power to critical loads. In the event of a
loss of off-site power, the critical load continues to be supplied by the UPS
inverter, which obtains power from the standby batteries. The UPS batteries will
16-3
10446175
continue to supply ac power through the inverter until the emergency generators
come on-line or commercial off-site ac power is restored.

In nuclear plants, chargers serve the station batteries which provide a de power
source to controls, instrumentation and switchgear. A portion of the de power
from the batteries is routed through inverters which provide a source of ac power
to critical equipment. Inverters and battery chargers in nuclear plants are, in
general, the same type, size, and construction as those found in the data base,
as illustrated in the examples from nuclear plants shown in Figure 16-3.
16.2 DATA BASE REPRESENTATION FOR BATTERY CHARGERS AND INVERTERS

Figures 16-4 through 16-15 present examples of battery chargers and inverters
within the data base. The data base inventory of inverters/chargers includes
about 90 examples, representing 36 sites and 14 of the earthquakes studied in
compiling the data base. Of this inventory, there is one instance of seismically
induced loss of function to an inverter.
Figure 16-16 presents a bar chart that illustrates the inventory of battery
chargers/inverters at various data base sites as a function of their estimated
PGA.
The general bounds of the data base representation for the equipment class of
battery chargers and inverters are summarized below.
Solid-state inverters and battery chargers are represented in free-standing,

rack-mounted, and wall-mounted configurations. Floor or wall anchorage of
cabinets includes bolts (typically 3/8- or 1/2-inch), welds, or friction clips.
• The sheet metal enclosure and all internal components

• Junction boxes attached to the cabinet
• Attached cable or conduit between the unit and the nearest building
anchor point
16-4
10446175
Basis for the Generic Bounding Soectrum
The station control building is a three-story steel-frame structure. The

basement of the station contains two battery chargers, which are bolted to steel
angle frames (Figure 16-4, lower photograph). The chargers were manufactured by
Powertronic Equipment Limited, of Ontario, Canada. The frame is bolted to the
concrete floor with four l-inch anchor bolts. The battery chargers were

approximately 0.60g, with strong motion occurring for a duration of about 15
seconds, during the 1983 Coalinga Earthquake. This PGA is a conservative
estimate, based on the nearest ground motion record of 0.56g (an average of the
horizontal components} recorded at the Pleasant Valley Plant much further from
the fault.
The plant contains three small battery chargers wall-mounted into the rear of
sheet metal cabinets (Figure 16-5, lower photograph). They are manufactured by
Nife Corporation of Rhode Island and operate at 240 volts, 20 amps de. All
battery chargers were undamaged by the earthquake.
site.
The plant contains one wall-mounted battery charger and a floor-mounted inverter.
The charger, manufactured by Power Conversion Products, operates at 120 volts, 5
amps. The inverter was manufactured by Exide Power Systems, and operates at
105/140 volts de input, 120 volts ac output (Figure 16-5, upper photograph). The
inverter was not anchored during the earthquake and slid several inches. Both
units were undamaged by the earthquake.
16-5
10446175
of the 1983 Coalinga sequence of earthquakes. Strong-motion monitors are located
in the station switchyard, as well as in the basement, operating floor, and on
the roof of the station building. The monitor located in the switchyard (free-
field) recorded an average horizontal peak ground acceleration of 0.56g, with a
duration of strong motion of about 15 seconds.
The station includes two floor-mounted battery chargers. The chargers,

manufactured by Exide, are anchored with four 1/2-inch bolts in the corners of
the cabinets. The units were undamaged by the earthquakes, but there was
evidence of impact with the adjacent wall.
The Devers Substation recorded an average horizontal PGA of 0.85g with a duration
of about six seconds, during the 1986 North Palm Springs Earthquake. The site
experienced from two to five times more motion than its design basis, resulting
in extensive damage to switchyard equipment.
The substation control building is a one-story reinforced concrete-block

structure with a wood diaphragm roof. The station includes two battery chargers
and one inverter (Figure 16-6). The units were undamaged by the earthquake and
operated for two hours following the event. Eventually, the batteries serving
the inverter were exhausted and the system switched off.

The experience data base includes one instance of seismic damage to an inverter
that resulted in a loss of function and several instances of seismic effects
which di_d not affect functionality.
At the Wells Fargo Data Processing Center, which experienced an estimated PGA in
excess of 0.30g during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake, one Uninterruptible Power
Supply (UPS) unit sustained five blown fuses following the earthquake (Figure 16-
12). The blown fuses in the unit caused a loss of emergency power to the
facility.
The UPS is an Emerson "Acu-Power" which regulates incoming ac power and supplies
emergency power to the facility. The system requires three units in order to
maintain full power. If less than three units are available, overload breakers
16-6
10446175
will actuate, and all UPS systems will disconnect. At the time of the
earthquake, one of the four UPS units was down for maintenance; the remaining
three units were operating to supply ac power to the facility.
Approximately 4-1/2 hours following the earthquake, system problems in the power
grid caused a loss of off-site power. When power was lost to the facility, one
of the operating UPS units sustained five blown fuses. The facility engineer and
the manufacturer suggested three possible explanations for the damage. When off-
site power is lost, emergency de power is supplied by batteries. If one of the
cells is not functional, certain fuses within the UPS will blow in order to
protect the more valuable subcomponents. Another potential explanation is that
power surges occurred prior to the loss of off-site power, which could blow fuses
in the unit. A third and equally plausible explanation is that the UPS unit
contained faulty fuses or other subcomponents.
At the Del Amo Substation, which experienced an estimated PGA of 0.20g during the
1987 Whittier Earthquake, a battery charger was tripped by the actuation of a
molded case, branch circuit breaker in the associated distribution panel {Figure
16-13). The distribution panel is a 110/220 volt dead front switchboard,
manufactured by Square D. The distribution panel is anchored with 1/2-inch bolts
in the corners of the cabinet, and the adjacent cabinets in the assembly are
bolted together. There is about a 1/2-inch clearance between the panel and the
adjacent wall. The breaker actuation appears to be the result of impact of the
panel with the wall.
At the California Federal Bank Data Processing Facility, an Emerson "Acu-Power"

Uninterruptible Power Supply {UPS) pulled or sheared all of its anchor bolts
{Figure 16-15). The unit was anchored with 3/8-inch shell type expansion
anchors. The UPS was not damaged, in spite of a PGA in excess of 0.40g measured
nearby.
At the Sanwa Bank Computer Facility, which experienced an estimated PGA of 0.40g
during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake, two UPS units sheared their anchorage and
slid about 12 inches during the earthquake. The cabinets were observed to have
poor anchorage-concrete pad edge distance. When power was restored, a momentary
surge in the incoming current to the UPS burned out several capacitors in the
inverters. The exact nature of the disturbance in the power supply was not
determined. Since the normal ac supply to the computers is through the UPS, the
10446175 16-7
data precessing system blacked out when the inverter capacitors burned out. The
ac supply to the computers was temporarily rerouted around the UPS and connected
directly to the emergency diesels which had been retained in operation.
No additional instances of seismically induced damage to inverters and battery

chargers were found in an extensive literature search/telephone survey.

The seismic experience data base indicates that static inverters and battery
chargers possess characteristics which generally preclude damage in earthquakes.
With the exception of units with poorly designed anchorage, the experience data
base demonstrates no tendency for seismic damage to static inverters and battery
chargers.
16.5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. "IEEE Standard for Qualification of Class IE Static Battery Chargers and
Inverters for Nuclear Power Generating Stations." n.d. IEEE Standard 650-
1979.
2. Underwriters Laboratory Standard UL-1236. August 1978. "Electric Battery
Chargers." Northbrook, IL.
3. National Electrical Manufacturer's Association (NEMA) Standard ICS-6.
April 1980. "Enclosures for Industrial Controls and Systems." Washington,
DC.
4. Ratelco Inc. June 1985. "Emergency AC Power: Count on It, with Ratelco
on Charge!" Power Systems Division.
5. Emerson Electric Co. April 1987. "AP300 Series 60 Hz Uninterruptible
Power System." Santa Ana, CA.
6. KW Control Systems, Inc. n.d. "Introduction to the Uniblock UPS System."
Middletown, NY.
7. Atlas Energy Systems. n.d. "The Atlas UPC/Uninterruptible Power
Conditioner."
8. RTE DELTEC Corporation. 1985. "Uninterruptible Power Systems." San
Diego, CA.
9. Square D Company. November 1984. "DC to AC Sine Wave Inverters Especially
for Telecommunications Systems."
10. T. B. Wood's Sons Company. January 1986. "E-TRAC AC Inverter."
Chambersburg, PA.
11. Zenith Controls, Inc. n.d. "Zenith ZTS Transfer Switches." Chicago, IL.
10446175
16-8
L2 DC CHOKE
AMMETER
REFERENCE
VOLTAGE
AMPLIFIER
VOLT
METER
FILTER
CAPACITORS
TIMER DC OUTPUT
OR FUSES
MANUAL FLOAT --------1
EQUALIZE
SWITCH
CURRENT
LIMIT
TRANSFORMER
SILICON DIODE
BRIDGE
INPUT
CIRCUIT
BREAKER
FLOAT
VOLTAGE
CONTROL
Courtesy Gould Incorporated

•
Figure 16-1. Typical wall-mounted solid-state battery charger.
10446175
16-9
Static bus transfer
switch
Input filter location
Ac output filter
inverter
power swifchinq
section
Figure 16-2. Typical inverter.
16-10
10446175
Figure 16-3. Static inverters (upper photograph) and battery chargers
(lower photograph ) in nuclear plant applications.
16-11
10446175
A wall-mounted PR Industries battery charger at the Rinaldi Receiving
Station.
At the Sylmar Converter Station,

Powertronic battery chargers are
bolted to a steel frame that is
bolted into the concrete floor.
Figure 16-4. Battery chargers at sites affected by the 1971 San Fernando
Earthquake.
16-12
10446175
This Exide inverter at the Main
Oil Pumping Plant was unanchored
at the time of_the earthquake.
It slid several inches without
damage.
This small wall-mounted battery

charger is bolted to the rear of
a sheet metal cabinet at the
Union Oil Plant.
Figure 16-5. Battery chargers and inverters at near-field sites affected

by the Coalinga sequence of earthquakes of 1983.
10446175
16-13
Figure 16-6. The Devers Substation includes an Elgar Inverter that was
undamaged by the 1986 North Palm Springs Earthquake.
16-14
10446175
The Rapel Hydroelectric Plant has approximately five AEG battery chargers
and five AEI inverters, each anchored with four 3/8-inch anchor bolts.
~ ~ ~
~~tWa$':>;:,~ ~:::.
c:;;t ~~ ~
Las Ventanas Power Plant contains at

least two inverters manufactured by
Solid-state Controls, Inc., each
anchored with four 3/8-inch anchor
bolts.
Figure 16-7. Battery chargers and inverters at sites affected by the

1985 Chile Earthquake.
16-15
10446175
The battery charger at the
Burbank Power Plant is bolted to
steel channels that are anchored
to the concrete floor with 1/2-
inch (est.) bolts.
SCI Inverter located in the

basement at the Glendale Power
Plant.

1971 San Fernando Earthquake.
16-16
10446175
This Elgar inverter, located at
the Ormond Beach Power Plant, is
bolted to steel angles that are
anchored to the concrete floor
with 5/8-inch bolts.
This C&D AutoReg battery charger

is wall-mounted in Unit 3
(nuclear) of the Humboldt Bay
Power Plant.

1973 Point Mugu Earthquake (upper photograph) and the 1975/1980 Humboldt
earthquakes (lower photograph).
16-17
10446175
These Exide battery chargers at
the Metcalf Substation are
anchored with·four 1/2-inch
bolts.
AIR battery charger at the

Renca Power Plant.
Figure 16-10. Battery chargers at sites affected by the 1984 Morgan Hill
Earthquake (upper photograph) and the 1985 Chile Earthquake
(lower photograph).
16-18
10446175
Figure 16-11. Single enclosure UPS systems at Adak Naval Station. No
units were damaged in the 1986 Adak, Alaska Earthquake.
16-19
10446175
Figure 16-12. The Wells Fargo Bank Computer Facility experienced an
estimated average horizontal PGA in excess of 0.30g during the 1987
Whittier Earthquake. There are four Emerson Acu-Power UPS units located
on the fourth floor of the facility. One of the UPS systems sustained
five blown fuses following the earthquake.
16-20
10446175
Figure 16-13. At the Del Amo Substation, affected by the 1987 Whittier
Earthquake, a battery charger (lower photograph) was tripped by the
actuation of a molded case circuit breaker in the associated distribution
panel (upper photograph). The breaker actuation was apparently the result
of the panel impacting the adjacent wall.
16-21
10446175
Figure 16-14. Examples of large capacity inverters, serving the UPS
systems of the data processing centers, are found in the Emerson "Acu-
Power" units at the Southern California Edison Dispatch Center, affected
by the 1987 Whittier Earthquake.
16-22
10446175
Figure 16-15. Anchorage failed on one of the Emerson "Acu-Power"
inverters at the California Federal Savings Data Processing Center, during
the 1987 Whittier Earthquake. The inverter slid about 2 inches, but was
undamaged. The lower photograph shows anchor brackets, at the base of the
inverters, that were added immediately following the earthquake as a
precaution against aftershocks. The remains of the original 3/8-inch
expansion anchors are visible adjacent to the brackets.
16-23
10446175
vZ-9I
NUMBER OF CHARGERS OR INVERTERS

0 (71 ... ...
0
N Ormond Beach Power Plarit
0
co Substation
-t,nl"T1
c X ...... Ada< Naval Station
<.Q
;::, "'C
C"lnlC
c-+-s-s
===""" Las Veritanas Power Plant, Renca Power Plarit
............ C'D
Onl Gates Substation
;::,;::, ...... Substation
(")~
~It) I ~
-s ...... Glendale Power Plant
ltlO..~
~
?(.)
...... c-+
;::,~ 0
c..
...... c-It)
en co
(")~.....0
~Vl(t)
c-+ltl(")
It) c-+
O..~nl "'tl
0 Vl c.. m
~ ...... l>
""""<
Cnl
;::,
;::,;::,
"
G)
:II 0
nc-+
c-+0
o·~
c:
zoco0
li!!i!!i!Ji;j:J!;!ii!!i:!!!i!i!\;i~~:!:;~~-~!~:~:::;:j:i;::;::;;:::]!!I::";)II!II:::::I:::::::::;:If!:;:;:j Rapel Hydro Plant
-'•""'S
O'<
;::,
0 l>
0""""
Vl
0
0 Wells Fargo Computer Ceriter *
""""
<.Q c-+ m
-s~ r-
Oc-+
c ...... m
;:,n :II
0.. l>
-f
3;::, -o.0 lf±±±±±r""' Rinaldi Receiving Station
O< z Sylmar Converter Station
c-+(t) (71
-'·""'S ,...0
oc-+
;:,It)
:t>CO
• -s <
m
Vl
):a~
.....o;:,
:II
l>
G)
-·----
...... 0..
...... c-
m
:I: Ill.
;:,~
Vl c-+
c-+ c-+
0
:II i- g:i!!
H•
~It) No
;:,-s
C"l'< o·
z ~ Union Oi. Main Oil Pumping Plants ~ ii
It)
Vl(")
;:s-
-fCO ~UJlLffiillt@ San Isidro Substation f ~~
-s~ l> '§. '8
nl""S
Vl<.Q
Cnl
'
......
i ~
I
-'""'S
C"+Vl Olinda Substation
......
;:,:::e:
<.Q ......
;:,
c-+
...... ;:s-
......
...... ;::,
0
co
i.
Or+
Vl ;:s-
0
co ~
Vlnl
OVl
""""It)
..... ~illtiililllliliJ Devers Substation
1l
Vl
3......
(")
!
l
?
CD
0
co
10446175
Section 17
ENGINE-GENERATORS
This class of equipment includes a wide range of sizes and types of generators
driven by piston engines or gas turbines. The equipment class of engine-
generators includes all direct attachments to the skid or engine block, but
excludes freestanding peripheral equipment, such as control panels, that are not
attached to the engine-generator structure.

Engine-generators are emergency power sources that provide bulk ac power in the
event of loss of off-site power. The primary components of engine-generators are
discussed in the sections that follow.
Generators are typically the brushless rotating-field type with either a rotating
rectifier exciter, or a solid-state exciter and voltage regulator. Both
synchronous and induction types of generators are used in power plant
applications. Generator capacity is measured in kilovolt-amperes (kVA) or
kilowatts (kW). In typical power plant applications, emergency generators range
from 200 kVA to 5000 kVA; electrical output is normally at 480, 2400, or 4160
volts.
Reciprocating-piston engines are the most common driver for emergency power
generators. Piston engines are normally diesel-fueled, although engines that
operate on alternate fuels, such as natural gas or oil, are common in facilities
which process these fuels. In typical power plant applications, piston engines
tange from tractor-size to locomotive-size, with corresponding horsepower ratings
ranging from 400 to 4000 hp.
Gas turbines are sometimes used as drivers for emergency generators due to the
advantages of relative simplicity (compared to piston engines), smooth operation,
compactness, and freedom from peripheral cooling water systems. Turbines are
17-1
10446175
typically fueled by diesel oil, gasoline, or kerosene. Like piston engines,
turbines range in size from 400 to 4000 hp.
Engine-generators normally include the piston engine and generator in a direct

shaft connection, bolted to a common steel skid. The skid or the engine block
also supports peripheral attachments such as conduit, piping, and a local control
and instrumentation panel. Figure 17-1 depicts a typical large diesel engine
with its peripheral attachments.
The engine-generator system includes peripheral components for cooling, heating,

starting, and monitoring operation, as well as supplying fuel, lubrication, and
air. The diesel engine typically includes the following components mounted to
the engine block:
• Fuel supply system. The fuel supply system includes the strainers,
filters, piping, and fuel pump.
• Lubrication system. The diesel-generator lubrication system
includes piping, filters, and the oil pump.
• Cooling system. This system includes a water-to-air (radiator and
fan) or a water-to-water heat exchanger mounted to the engine block
or supporting skid.
• Heater. The electric jacket-water heaters are installed to
maintain the water temperature at about 90"F, in order to
facilitate easier starting at cold ambient temperatures.
• Air intake system. This system includes the ducting, fans, and
filters necessary to limit temperature variations in the generator
room and to make clean, cool air available to the engine.
• Exhaust system. The exhaust system includes a muffler and the
ducting that directs the exhaust out of the diesel room. There is
generally a collar in the wall opening and an expansion joint in
the ducting to absorb operating vibrations and thermal expansion.
• Starting system. Medium and large engines generally rely on
compressed air for starting. Air in a receiver tank powers air
motors driving the crankshaft through a gear linkage, or the air
can go directly to the cylinders in large diesels. Battery-driven
electric motors are sometimes used on smaller capacity systems.
• Local control and instrument panel. The local engine control panel
contains gauges and controls designed to monitor conditions such as
low oil pressure, engine overheat, engine overspeed and generator
overload.
17-2
10446175
Free-standing peripheral equipment that supports the operation of the engine-
generator would typically include a local fuel (day) tank with its supply pump,
an air compressor, and plenum tanks for the engine pneumatic starting system,
switchgear cabinets (which can include an automatic transfer switch), and a
control panel for the generator. This equipment is addressed separately in their
respective equipment classes, rather than as part of the engine-generator.
Figure 17-2 illustrates an engine-generator with typical attachments and
peripheral equipment.
Equipment Anchorage
All components of engine-generators are bolted either to the engine block or to
the supporting skid. The skid is normally anchored to the supporting concrete
foundation with cast-in-place bolts through bolt holes in the skid base channel.
Smaller engine-generator units may be supported on isolation mounts.
Manufacturers will sometimes supply engine-generator sets and all peripheral
equipment as a package mounted in an outdoor enclosure. A variation of this
design is to mount the engine-generator set on a trailer, as a mobile emergency
power source.
Engine-generator sets are used as emergency power sources in power and industrial
facilities. For nuclear power plant applications, Regulatory Guide 1.9 requires
the emergency engine-generator set to be capable of:
"(1) starting and accelerating a number of large motor loads

in rapid succession and also sustaining the loss of all or
any part of such loads while maintaining voltage and
frequency within acceptable limits and (2) supplying power
continuously to the equipment needed to maintain the plant in
a safe condition if an extended loss of off-site power
occurs."
Typical nuclear plant equipment powered by an engine-generator set includes

critical pumps, ventilation systems, and critical instrumentation and control
systems. Examples of nuclear plant engine-generators are presented in Figure 17-
3.
17-3
10446175
17.2 DATA BASE REPRESENTATION FOR ENGINE-GENERATORS
Figures 17-4 through 17-15 present examples of engine-generators within the data
base. The data base inventory of engine-generators includes about.60 examples,
base. Of this inventory, there are several instances of operation problems with
engine-generators and one case of seismic damage to an outboard bearing
associated with a diesel generator.
Figure 17-16 presents a bar chart that illustrates the inventory of engine-
generators at various data base sites as a function of their estimated PGA.
The general bounds of data base representation for the equipment class of engine-
generators are summarized below.
Generators driven by piston engines and gas turbines are represented in the range
from 30 kW to 4.5 MW. Data base representation includes the following
components:
• Driver (piston engine or gas turbine)

• Generator
• Attached instrumentation and controls
• Attached conduit, piping, and ducting to the nearest building
anchor point

The Union Oil Butane Plant had a peak ground acceleration of approximately 0.60g,
with strong motion occurring for about 15 seconds during the 1983 Coalinga
Earthquake. This PGA is a conservative estimate, based on the nearest ground
motion record of 0.56g (an average of the horizontal components) recorded much
further from the fault.
The plant includes 14 large, piston engine-powered compressors (Figure 17-4,

upper photograph). These engines are representative in structure, size, and
function of the piston engines that power emergency generators in power plant
applications. The units shut down during the earthquake due to the loss of
pressure in their pneumatic control system that was caused by a broken pipe
elsewhere in the plant. The engines were undamaged by the earthquake.
10446175
17-4
The United Technologies Chemical Plant, located near the epicenter of the 1984
Morgan Hill Earthquake, is estimated to have experienced an average PGA of
approximately 0.50g. Strong motion lasted for about 8 seconds. The facility,
which was built in the early 1960s, covers over 5,200 acres and includes dozens
of installations which could not be investigated in detail.
The facility includes two emergency diesel generators (Figure 17-5) that serve
one of the fuel processing areas. During the earthquake, power was lost to the
site and remained out for several hours. The diesel generators started
automatically, and generated emergency power during this time without
malfunction.
The IBM/Santa Teresa Computer Facility experienced a PGA of 0.37g, with strong
motion occurring for about 8 seconds during the 1984 Morgan Hill Earthquake.
This facility included several strong-motion monitors, one located in the free
field, 100 yards from the main building.
The plant includes two 3500 kW turbine-powered emergency generators and one 210
kW diesel generator (Figure 17-6). Power was not lost at this facility;
therefore, the generators were not required to start. The engine-generators were
not damaged by the 1984 earthquake.
The California Fe~ral Bank Computer Facility (Cal Fed) experienced an average
horizontal PGA in excess of 0.40g during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake. The
strong-motion record nearest to the facility is located at the Rush Substation
less than 1/2 mile away. The duration of the strong motion of the earthquake was
3-5 seconds.
The Cal Fed Facility is housed in a four-story, braced steel-frame structure.

The building was constructed in 1979. Four 660 kW diesel generators,
manufactured by Waukesha (Figure 17-7) are located on the ground floor of the
building. The units are supported on spring-type isolation mounts with seismic
stops (bumpers).
The units started automatically during the earthquake, but were manually shut off
after a few minutes. Following the earthquake, there was evidence of prying of
the expansion bolts anchoring the seismic stops. In addition, on one unit, the
10446175
17-5
motion was sufficient to cause a leak in the exhaust system. The leak occurred
at the slip-on connection of the exhaust muffler (Figure 17-7, upper photograph).

The experience data base contains one site that experienced damage to an engine-
generator, two sites that experienced minor effects that did not impede
operation, and four sites that experienced operational problems with engine-
generators.
At Power Plant Number 3, the main power facility serving Adak Naval Station in
the Aleutian Islands, an outboard pillow-block bearing on a
3 MW diesel generator was damaged several days after the May 7, 1986 earthquake.
The diesel engine and generator are mounted on different bases (Figure 17-13
lower photograph). During the earthquake or one of the major aftershocks,
differential displacement caused a misalignment in the shaft, which damaged the
bearing. Tolerance for the shaft must be within 0.003 inch. Ground motion is
estimated to be 0.25g, with a duration in excess of 30 seconds.
At the Southern California Edison headquarters, located near the epicenter of the
1987 Whittier Earthquake, two of the four small emergency diesel generators would
not start, following the earthquake. The diesel generators are 50-75 kW units,
mounted on the roof of the three-story building. The causes of failure to start
were attributed by plant maintenance personnel as obstructions in the fuel line
of one diesel, and a failed relay in the control panel of the other.
One of the two diesel generators was supported on spring vibration isolators,
which buckled during the earthquake as the unit shifted to one side (Figure 17-
14). Shifting of the diesel broke a flexible coupling on the exhaust discharge
pipe attached to the muffler. This diesel had a chronic history of start-up
problems which were reported by facility maintenance personnel as due to either
debris or air pockets in the fuel line. Fuel line problems were believed to be
the cause of start-up failure during the earthquake.
The other diesel generator failed to start because of a damaged relay in its
local control panel, mounted to the wall adjacent to the diesel (Figure 17-15).
The facility maintenance personnel reported that an electrical contractor had
discovered the faulty relay following the earthquake and replaced it. The cause
10446175
17-6
of the relay failure, whether due to an electrical fault or vibration damage, was
never determined. It is possible that the faulty relay was a pre-existing
condition that was discovered when the diesel attempted to start during the
earthquake. The diesel generators, however, are tested periodically, and this
particular unit was operable when tested a few weeks prior to the earthquake.
The nearby California Federal Savings Data Processing Center includes an on-site
power plant containing four 660 kilowatt diesel generators (Figure 17-7). The
units are supported on vibration isolators equipped with seismic bumpers mounted
next to the base channel of the skid. Impact of the diesel skid against the
bumpers during the earthquake was sufficient to loosen several of the 1/2-inch
expansion anchors securing the bumpers to the floor.
The exhaust system for the diesels includes a muffler and discharge duct
supported above the diesel on spring hangers with diagonal cable restraints. On
-one unit, swaying of the muffler during the earthquake partially dislodged the
slip-on connection of the exhaust muffler to the engine block. This breach in
the exhaust ducting leaked fumes into the diesel room. Since the air intake to
each diesel draws from the ambient air, it is possible that pr~longed leakage of
exhaust fumes would have choked the diesels. However, the diesels were shut off
shortly after the earthquake to purposely stop the supply of emergency power
(broken fire sprinklers were spraying electrical equipment within the data
processing areas).
Another site affected by the 1987 Whittier Earthquake was the Pacific Bell phone
system switching station at Rosemead. The station includes two 650 kilowatt gas
turbine generators. When off-site power was lost at the station following the
earthquake, an attempt was made to start the turbine generators. One turbine
could not be started due to apparent mechanical problems that had plagued the
unit prior to the earthquake. The remaining turbine generator was started and
operated for about 1-1/2 hours. The unit was eventually shut off due to
overheating. Portable generators were then brought in to provide emergency power
until off-site service was restored.
At the Burbank Power Plant, ~ffected by the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake, two
tripped protective relays in the generator control panel caused the gas turbine
generator to fail to start on demand following the earthquake.
17-7
10446175
At the Concan Oil Refinery, affected by the 1985 Chile Earthquake, the emergency
diesel generator started during the earthquake, but tripped off-line due to
protective relay actuation. The relay was reset and the diesel operated
properly.
Instances of seismically induced damage to engine-generators are known to have

are known~ The most important examples are discussed below.
At the Anchorages Municipal Light and Power Plant, affected by the 1964
Anchorage, Alaska Earthquake, emergency diesel generators were unable to operate
following the earthquake because of a loss of water to the facility from broken
water mains. Water is needed for both the air compressor and the diesel
generator cooling systems.
At the Elmendorf Air Force Base Hospital, affected by the 1964 Anchorage, Alaska
Earthquake, two flexible connectors in the cooling water system and one flexible
exhaust pipe associated with the emergency diesel generators were damaged. The
hospital emergency power system consists of three 100 kW diesel engine-
generators. During the earthquake, two of the three units went off-line because
of damage to attached piping. Evidently, the earthquake caused the overhead
piping serving the generator sets to swing excessively, placing heavy strains on
the flexible connectors in the cooling water and exhaust pipes. The rubber hose
connectors in the cooling water lines on two of the engines broke loose during
the earthquake, and the loss of cooling water caused the units to overheat and
shut down. A flexible connector in the exhaust line serving one of these engines
also developed cracks in the metal bellows that had to be repaired. The engine-
generator units were undamaged.
Seismic damage to engine-generator sets from inadequate anchorage, poorly

designed isolation mounts, damage to attached piping (similar to the instance at
Elmendorf Hospital, discussed above), or loss of water due to broken water mains
(similar to the instance at the Anchorage Municipal Light and Power Plant,
discussed above) has occurred at several sites, including those affected by the
1964 Niigata Earthquake, the 1969 Santa Rosa Earthquake, the 1971 San Fernando
Earthquake (including Olive View Medical Center, Pacoima Hospital, and Holy Cross
17-8
10446175
Hospital), the 1972 Managua Earthquake (including ENALUF Power Plant), the 1978
Miyagi-ken-Oki Earthquake (including Sendai Sewage Treatment Plant and other
pumping plants), and the 1986 North Palm Springs Earthquake (including Whitewater
Microwave Tower Communication System).

The seismic experience data base indicates that engine-generators possess
for engine-generators:
• Isolation Mounts. Engine-generators supported on vibration

isolation mounts, not specifically designed to accommodate
seismically induced lateral forces, have dislodged at several data
base sites.
• Attachments. Flexibly supported attachments (e.g., exhaust
mufflers, piping, air lines) have shown a tendency to become
dislodged during strong motion.
• Relay Actuation. Spurious actuation of trip-sensitive components
(e.g., protective relays) has caused engine-generators to stop or
fail to start at several data base sites.
17.5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. December 1979. "Selection, Design,
and Qualification of Diesel-generator Units Used as Standby (on-site)
Electric Power Systems at Nuclear Power Plants." Regulatory Guide 1.9.
Revision 2.
2. IEEE Power Engineering Society, Nuclear Power Engineering Committee. 1977.
"IEEE Standard Criteria for Diesel-generator Units Applied as Standby Power
Supplies for Nuclear Power Generating Stations." IEEE Std 387.
3. Oliverson, R. L. June 1978. "Emergency Power Systems." Specifying
Engineer: 123-130.
4. Cassidy, V. M. May 1984. "On-site Power Generation." Specifying
Engineer: 151-159.
5. "Generators." April 1982. Power: 362-366.
6. Griffith, M. Shan. April 1983. "Understanding ac Generator Control
Systems." EC&M: 53-58.
7. "Oil and engines." April 1982. Power: 360-366.
17-9
10446175
8. Cummins Engine Company, Inc. n.d. "Accessories Controls." Complete
Literature Notebook.
9. Cummins Engine Company, Inc. n.d. "25-1200 kW Generator Set." Complete
Literature Notebook.
10. Katolight Corporation. n.d. Product Literature Notebook on Standby _Power
Systems.
11. Detroit Diesel Allison Company. n.d. Catalog of Diesel-powered Generator
Sets from 40 kW to 1400 kW.
12. Cooper-Bessemer Company. n.d. "Diesel Generators."
17-10
10446175
Twelve cylinder piston engine
Exhaust manifold
Exhaust duct
Engine coolant
heat exchanger
--
......,
I
Engine control panel Steel skid Generator relay panel
Courtesy Fairbanks Morse
Figure 17-1. Primary components of a piston. engine-generator.
10446175
DC FEED TO BATTERY
AND ENGINE START
CONTROL
I
SILENCER
AC FEED FROM
NORMAL UTILITY
......
........
I
......
N
ENGINE GENERATOR ~
CONTROL / ~
GENERATOR-MOUNTED
CIRCUIT BREAKER VIBRATION BATTERIES AC JACKET

ISOLATORS WATER HEATER
TYPICAL PACKAGE I
GENERATOR SET INSTALLATION SUCTION LINE
------- Courtesy Caterpillar Tractor Co.
Figure 17-2. Typical engine-generator systems peripherals.
10446175
Figure 17-3. Engine-generators in nuclear plant applications.
17-13
10446175
The 14 piston engine-powered compressors at the Union Oil Butane Plant are
structurally representative of piston engines that power emergency
generators. The units shut down during the earthquake due to a loss of
pressure in their pneumatic control system, caused by a broken pipe
elsewhere in the plant. The engines were undamaged by the earthquakes
near Coalinga that occurred from May through July 1983.
The 16 piston engine-powered compressors at the Kettleman Compressor

Station are structurally representative of piston engines that power
emergency generators. In particular, all of the peripheral systems
(cooling water, lubrication, air intake, exhaust ducting) are included in
these engines. The compressor units operated through the Coalinga
earthquakes without shutting down.
Figure 17-4. Examples of large piston engines at sites affected

by the series of earthquakes near Coalinga in 1983.
17-14
10446175
Courtesy Katolight
Figure 17-5. The United Technologies Chemical Plant, located near the
fault rupture of the Morgan Hill Earthquake, includes two 260 kVA
emergency diesel-generators serving sections of the facility. Both units
started automatically upon loss of off-site power.
17-15
10446175
Two turbine-powered emergency generators mounted on trailer supports are
located adjacent to the HVAC plant. The units are 3500 kW diesel-fueled
turbine-generators that include all peripheral systems on the trailer-
mounted skid.
The cooling tower pumps and forced-draft fans are served by their own
emergency generator. The generator, the 210 kW diesel piston engine, and
all peripheral systems are located in a sheet metal enclosure.
Figure 17-6. Emergency generators at the IBM/Santa Teresa Facility,

affected by the 1984 Morgan Hill Earthquake. The units were not required
to start since, unlike the surrounding area, the facility did not lose
off-site power.
17-16
10446175
Figure 17-7. The California Federal Data Processing Center includes an
on-site power plant with four 660 kilowatt diesel generators. During the
1987 Whittier Earthquake, the diesels started automatically, but were
later shut down to prevent an electrical fire ha~ard in the data
processing area where fire water piping had failed. Rocking of the
diesels on their isolation mounts caused minor prying of the expansion
bolts anchoring their seismic bumpers (arrow, lower photograph). Swaying
of the rod-supported muffler dislodged the exhaust duct of one unit from
its slide-in connection to the engine block (arrow, upper photograph).
17-17
10446175
Figure 17-8. The Kettleman Compressor Station generates its own power
with three 500 kVA natural gas-fueled engine-generators. The units
operated through the Coalinga earthquakes without shutting down.
17-18
10446175
The engine-generator at the Rapel Hydroelectric Plant is a 260 kVA diesel-
powered unit manufactured by Hanstill of Germany. The unit is not
equipped with an automatic start system, but was manually started
following the earthquake.
The engine-generator at Las Ventanas Copper Refinery is a 1050 kVA

diesel-powered unit manufactured by Siemens Corporation of Germany. The
unit started automatically upon loss of power during the earthquake.
Figure 17-9. Engine-generators at sites affected by the March

1985 earthquake in Chile.
17-19
10446175
The 190 kVA diesel-generator at the Vicuna Hospital started automatically
upon loss of power during the earthquake.
The engine-generator at the Concon Water Treatment Plant is a 950 kVA

diesel-powered unit manufactured by AEG of Germany. The unit is not
equipped with an automatic start system, but was manually started
following the earthquake.
Figure 17-10. Engine-generators at sites affected by the March 1985

earthquake in Chile.
17-20
10446175
Figure 17-11. The emergency diesel generator at Devers Substation started
and functioned properly following the 1986 North Palm Springs Earthquake
(the unit operated for two hours before it ran out of gas and stopped).
17-21
10446175
Figure 17-12. The Pacific Bell Telephone headquarters, located in
downtown Los Angeles, includes a 1000 kW diesel generator, which started
automatically in the 1987 Whittier Earthquake. The lower photograph shows
the local control panel mounted on the diesel skid.
17-22
10446175
Figure 17-13. At Power Plant Number 3, the main power facility serving
Adak Naval Station in the Aleutian Islands, an outboard pillow-block
bearing on a 3 MW diesel generator was damaged in the May 7, 1986 Alaska
Earthquake. The bearing sits on a different foundation from the diesel
generator.
17-23
10446175
Figure 17-14. One of the 75 kW diesel generators mounted on the roof of
the Southern California Edison (SCE) headquarters building shifted
laterally during the 1987 Whittier Earthquake, buckling its spring
isolation mounts (lower photograph). Shifting of the unit broke the
coupling of the exhaust pipe to the muffler mounted atop the diesel (upper
right photograph).
17-24
10446175
Figure 17-15. One of th~ 50 kW diesel generators mounted on the roof of
the SCE headquarters failed to start due to a faulty relay in its local
control panel mounted to the adjacent wall (lower right photograph). The
cause of the relay failure was never determined, since it was replaced by
an electrical contractor shortly after the earthquake.
17-25
10446175
C)
0
0)
ci
(1)
Vl
ns
..c
-c
.
n$(1)
+-' +-'
UOJlelsqns sJaAaa nsns
-ou
......
(l)"'C
C) us::
S::•r-
0 (1)
CX) ...... (1)
~~
0 (l)n$
c..
xs::
(l)C
U+-'
...... u
...... Es::
Vl:::l
...1 ...... 4-
<C (1)
1- Vl4-
t»Z c
(1)
0 0 ..c: Vl
U) N +-'Vl
0 a:
0
c
s:: .--
J: ..c: s::
+-' ......
w ......
&. JEJ!dSOH eunO!J\ G
<C
3:0'l
Vl•r-
s::
~., J.UBid Bu!dWilcf oauon a:
..
;t
w
>
~+-'
c.-
+-' :;,
n1Vl
! <C
i, :!
: lUBJd JBO!Walj:) Sa!BOJOUljoa1 paJ!Un
C) .......
0
ll)
z
0
~(1)
(1)~
s::
(l)V)
J ..."'.. 0 i=
<C
0')(1)
I u
(l)S::
~
..
r::
~
E
~
a:
w
...1
s::ns
...... +-'
O')Vl
'lil w s::s::
Ci.i
a;
~ 0
(1)•.-
> g>. 0 4-.--

c.-
z"'
r~ n S.lelJBnbpeeH 30S <C
c
<(
~ ;t~
lUBJd O!JlOaJOOJPAH Jade~ t»Z
>,
~
<
8 '§~ 0 ::;) c
+-' s::
~: JaJ.Uao Ja~dwoo ¥JB8
M
~
fi
...~~ ~ ~
&
peeweso~ - UO!l"EilS 1198 O!J!O"Eid
~ 0
0 a:
G
s::c
(1)•.-
> +-'
s::c
l~~i J., AJ!J!O"EI::l esaJal "EilU"BS\ ~ 81 ~ .,.... E
<C "'0 -c
w
asf £~ ~ a.. (l)S::
+-':::l
~E ~ 4i uc
<~ ::;: .. ~ (1)~
.-- O'l
(1)
liD
it it V) 4-
it
C) c
0
(") •S::
1.0 c
0 ............
I +-'
"
...... u
s::
:;,
(1)4-
~
:::ln$
O'l
...... Vl
u... ns
UO!lBlS .JOsseJdwoo ueweme>l C)
0
N
ci
.,... .,... 0
SHO.l. '1H3N3~ 3NI~N3 .:::10 H381111nN
17-26
10446175
Section 18
INSTRUMENTS ON RACKS
Instrument racks are steel frames used to provide mounting for local controls and
instrumentation, such as signal transmitters to remote control panels. The
equipment class of instruments on racks includes all the components commonly
mounted to a rack (e.g., transmitters, gauges, recorders, pressure switches,
tubing, conduit, and junction boxes), as well as the supporting structure.

Instruments on racks are a primary element in control and instrumentation
systems. The starting point in instrumentation systems is a signal transducer,
typically mounted to the pipe, pressure vessel, or item of equipment to be
monitored. Most modern power and industrial facilities locate instrument racks
in the general vicinity of the equipment being controlled or _monitored. A rack
typically consolidates the transducer or control signals from several equipment
items in its immediate vicinity. The components on an instrument rack either
allow local monitoring or control of equipment in the vicinity, or amplify and
transmit transducer signals to a remote readout or controller, typically in the
plant main control room.
Presented below are brief descriptions of the more common structural

configurations of instrument racks, and of the common components attached to
racks.
Racks
Instrument racks usually consist of steel members (typically steel angle, pipe,
channel, or Unistrut) bolted or welded together into a frame. Components are
attached either directly to the rack members or to metal panels that are welded
or bolted to the rack. The racks are normally bolted to the floor: at the
bottom corners of the frame and at the base of the diagonal braces running from
the rear face of the rack to the floor. Floor-mounted instrument racks typically
18-1
10446175
range from 4 to 8 feet in height, with widths varying from 3 to 10 feet,
depending on the number of components supported on the rack. Examples of this
rack configuration are illustrated in Figures 18-12 and 18-13.
A simpler configuration of an instrument rack is a single floor-mounted post

supporting one or two components as illustrated in Figure 18-8.
Wall-mounted and structural column-mounted racks are often used for supporting
only a few components. Examples of direct wall or column mounting are
illustrated in Figure 18-9.
Components
Prior to the 1970s, instrumentation and control systems usually involved a
combination of pneumatic and electronic systems. Electronic systems were used
for functions such as temperature monitoring (through thermocouples), starting,
stopping, and throttling electric motors, and monitoring electric power (such as
through ammeters). Pneumatic systems were used for monitoring fluid pressure,
liquid level, fluid flow, and for adjusting pneumatically-actuated control
valves.
In the 1970s, electronic control and instrumentation systems replaced pneumatic

systems in many power plant applications. The primary effect of this trend on
instrument racks was the replacement of transmitters that amplify a pneumatic
signal (pneumatic relays) with transmitters that convert a pneumatic signal from
the transducer to an electric signal to be transmitted to the main control panel.
Because of the range of ages of the facilities investigated, the data base offers
a wide diversity of representation in both electronic and pneumatic
instrumentation and control systems. Facilities constructed prior to 1970
usually include a mixture of electronic and pneumatic components on instrument
racks (Figure 18-10). Facilities constructed after 1970 show an increasing trend
toward electronic control and monitoring systems (Figure 18-11).
Typical components supported on instrument racks include:
• Pressure Switches. Piston and diaphragm types (Figure 18-1)
18-2
10446175
• Transmitters. Pneumatic or electronic pressure, level, and flow
signal transmitters (Figure 18-2)
• Gauges. Pneumatic, bourdon tube, and diaphragm types (Figure 18-
3), or electronic gauges or meters
• Recorders. Typically polar-type chart recorders (Figure 18-4)
• Hand Switches. For low power circuits not requiring motor
controllers or switches
• Manifold Valves. Small hand-operated valves isolating input tubing
to pneumatic components
• Solenoid Valves. For electronic control of pneumatic systems
Attachments to instrument racks include steel or plastic tubing from pressure

taps (mounted in tanks and pipes), and conduit for transmitting the converted
signals to electronic instrument readouts mounted on central control panels.
Junction boxes for instrumentation cable are also frequently attached to
instrument racks. Certain control and instrumentation components are sometimes
mounted to the piping or pressure vessels they serve. An example is illustrated
by the level switches shown in Figure 18-5.
Equipment Anchorage
Instrument racks are mounted in a variety of ways, including:
• Concrete expansion anchors into the floor (Figure

18-10)
• Concrete expansion anchors into the wall (Figure 18-9)
• Welds to building structural members (Figure 18-16)
• Welds to base plates (Figure 18-15, lower photograph)
Components are typically attached to the rack with U-bolts or Unistrut

connections; however, friction clips or sheet metal screws are also used.
The primary function of an instrument rack is to provide an accessible
consolidation point for mounting transmitters and local controls and
instrumentation. Examples of nuclear plant instrument racks are presented in
Figure 18-6.
18-3
10446175
18.2 DATA BASE REPRESENTATION FOR INSTRUMENTS ON RACKS
Figures 18-1 through 18-5 and 18-7 through 18-17 present examples of instruments
on racks within the data base. The data base inventory of instruments on racks
includes over 70 examples of racks with a cumulative total of over 200
components, representing 20 sites and 11 of the earthquakes studied in compiling
the data base. Of this inventory, there are no instances of seismic damage to
racks or rack-mounted instruments.
Figure 18-18 presents a bar chart that illustrates the inventory of instrument
racks at various data base sites as a function of their estimated PGA.
instruments on racks are summarized below.
Instrument racks constructed from steel members that are either welded or bolted
together are represented in a wide variety of configurations. The data base
contains representation of free-standing instrument racks, floor-mounted posts,
wall-mounted, and structural column-mounted racks. Both pneumatic and electronic
components are represented in the experience data base, as well as associated
tubing, wiring, and junction boxes.

1979 Imperial Valley Earthquake. Strong motion at the site lasted about 15
secoAds. The site ground motion is based on measurements from an instrument
located within 1/2 mile of the plant.
The plant includes several instrument racks containing dials, pressure

transmitters, and switches {Figures 18-7). Neither the instruments nor their
supporting racks were damaged in the earthquake.
much further from the fault. The duration of strong motion at the site was
18-4
10446175
Typical instruments at the site include pressure transmitters attached to posts
{Figure 18-8, upper photograph). Neither instruments nor their supporting
columns were damaged in the earthquake sequence.
estimated at 0.60g, and the ground motion spectrum corresponding to the Main Oil
Plant is applicable here.
Typical instruments at the site include pressure transmitters attached to

structural columns {Figure 18-8, lower photograph). Neither the transmitters nor
their supporting columns were damaged in the earthquake sequence.
The IBM/Santa Teresa Computer Facility experienced a PGA of 0.37g, with strong
motion occurring for about 8 seconds during the 1984 Morgan Hill Earthquake.
This facility included several strong-motion monitors, one located in the free
field, 100 yards from the main building.
The facility includes wall-mounted pressure transducers and recorders {Figure 18-
9). The transmitters were not damaged in the earthquake.

The experience data base includes no instances of seismic effects to instruments
that resulted in a permanent loss of function. However, spurious actuation of
switches that are mounted on racks, equipment, or other structures, has affected
at least four facilities in the experience data base.
At The Valley Steam Plant, affected by the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake, the
seismic motion caused the actuation of a mercoid switch. The oscillation of the
mercury in the switch, which controls low pressure fuel gas, caused the Unit 3
boilers to trip.
At The Humboldt Bay Power Plant, a mercoid switch actuated during the 1975
Ferndale Earthquake. Actuation of the mercoid switch caused the motor-operated
gas supply valve to Unit 1 to close, resulting in the tripping of the Unit 1
boiler.
18-5
10446175
At Steam Plant Number 3 on Adak Naval Station, affected by the 1986 Adak
Earthquake, two pressure switches were tripped (Figure 18-1). During the
earthquake, vibration of the internal push rod caused the actuation of diaphragm-
type sudden pressure switches on two of the boilers. These sudden pressure
switches are on a "hair-trigger" and are easily actuated by vibrations. The
actuation of the pressure switches tripped an auxiliary relay, which, in turn,
tripped the MCC controlling the boiler fan motor. There was no damage to any of
the equipment in this system.
At the New Zealand Distillery, which experienced an estimated PGA of 0.50g during
the 1987 New Zealand Earthquake, a level controller was found to be non-
functional following the earthquake (Figure 18-17). The controller monitors the
level of the distillation column through a diaphragm-actuated differential
pressure sensor. The controller is calibrated to operate at a range of 3 to 15
psi. Apparently, sloshing of the fluid in the distillation column during the
earthquake caused a pressure surge, which, in turn, tripped the pneumatic
overload relay within the controller. Once the relay was manually reset, the
controller was operational.
No instances of seismically induced damage to instruments, racks, or attached

tubing and wiring were found in an extensive literature search and telephone
survey.

The seismic experience data base indicates that instruments on racks possess
exception of spurious actuation of some types of the instruments (e.g., pressure
switches, mercoid switches, level controllers), the experience data base includes
no instances of seismic damage to rack-mounted instruments.
18.5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Robertshaw Controls Company. n.d. "Industrial Gages: Pressure, Test,
Compound, Vacuum." Catalog G.
2. Robertshaw Controls Company. n.d. "Current - Pneumatic Transducers,
Models 443A and 445A." Product Specification Model 443A/445A.
3. Robertshaw Controls Company. n.d. "Level Ac Level Switch SL-200 Series."
Product Specification Model SL-200.
18-6
10446175
4. Dresser Industries, Instrument Division. n.d. "B-Series Industrial
Controls."
5. The Babcock & Wilcox Company. 1987. "Type BC Electronic Transmitters."
Product Specification E21-26-8.
6. G. W. Dahl Company, Incorporated. February 1981. "Advanced, Two-Wire
Pneumatic-To-Current Transmitter." Application Bulletin.
7. Elliott, T. C. September 1975. "Key Measurements in Power and Process."
Power. Special Report.
18-7
10446175
~~··;"/'"~.:::
~II. .. _
-~ ~~@ /Insulation
~ £§SV @~~--~
~ @~ '
~---Push Rod /Switch Element
~ ® ®Q~~
Range Spring ·
~@@
--
-c Gasket\
-=
1Cover
_....--spring Guide ~~ --=-::::::;o--~~
@ II ~(S[;l®[/V ~
~------Piston/Cylinder Assembly [I e . c~~. ~
c::>-- Diaphragm
~---Retaining Ring
I I r.
L ~ · ~
0 .•
o---0-Ring
-~~ Flenge A8Hrnbly/PrMaure Connec:tlon
~
e e
9 9
<a 9
~~
te"Jl J\1
@ Courtesy Ashcroft
Type 400 Pressure
Switch Illustrated
Figure 18-1. The primary components of a pressure switch are shown in the
lower sketch. The Ashcroft pressure switch shown in the photograph
monitors steam pressure on a boiler at the Adak Naval Base in the Aleutian
Islands. In the 1986 Adak Earthquake, the switch actuated, tripping the
steam plant off-line.
18-8
10446175
PROCESS
FLANGE
Courtesy Rosemount Inc.
Figure 18-2. The primary components of a Rosemount pneumatic-to-

electronic signal transmitter are shown in the sketches. The photograph
is of a rack of Rosemount transmitters supported on a floor-mounted post
at the California Federal Data Center, near the epicenter of the 1987
Whittier Earthquake. All transmitters in the facility were undamaged
following the earthquake, but required minor recalibration due to the
reconstruction of the HVAC duct system that they monitor.
18-9
10446175
BOURDON TUBE"
POINTER
MOVEMENT
\----TIP"
"PRESSURE ELEMENT ASSEMBLY
BOURDON GAUGE ILLUSTR.A.TED
Figure 18-3. By far the most common instrument in power plant and
industrial facilities is the simple Bourdon tube pressure gauge. The
sketch shows the basic components of the pneumatic-powered device. A
typical array of Bourdon tube pressure gauges is shown in the lower
photograph at El Centro Steam Plant.
18-10
10446175
1. Servo Module
2. Chart
3. Pen
4. Pen Lifter
· 5. Platen
6. Setpoint Knob
7. Setpoint Index
8. Case
9. On-Off Switch
10. Serve Module/Pen Linkage
11. Air Gages
12. Air-0-Line 2-Mode
13. Air-0-Line Control Linkage
14. Pneumatic Control Bypass
15. Chart-Drive Motor
16. Terminal Board
17. Sub-Assembly Plate
18. Door
19. Door Latch
Courtesy Honeywell Process Control Division
Figure 18-4. Polar-type chart recorders are sometimes mounted near the
equipment they monitor, rather than on a centralized control panel. One
example is shown here of a pneumatic-operated Honeywell chart recorder
mounted to a concrete column in the HVAC plant of the IBM/Santa Teresa
Facility near Morgan Hill, California. Details of the recorder internals
are shown in the photographs at left.
18-11
10446175
Courtesy Robertshaw
Controls Company
Figure 18-5. Examples of components mounted directly to the pressure

vessels they control are illustrated by these Robertshaw level switches
mounted on feedwater heaters at El Centro Steam Plant. The lower sketch
shows the primary components of the level switch.
18-12
10446175
Figure 18-6. Instrument racks in nuclear plant applications.
18-13
10446175
Figure 18-7. Instrument racks at El Centro Steam Plant in the Imperial
Valley.
18-14
10446175
Figure 18-8. Individually mounted pressure transmitters at the Main Oil
Pumping Plant (upper photograph) and the Shell Water Treatment Plant
(lower photograph). Both facilities are located in the near-field of the
1983 Coalinga earthquakes.
18-15
10446175
Figure 18-9. Instrument racks at the IBM/Santa Teresa Facility near
Morgan Hill.
18-16
10446175
Figure 18-10. Instrument racks at the Valley Steam Plant (upper
photograph) and the Burbank Power Plant {lower photograph). Both
facilities were affected by the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake.
18-17
10446175
Figure 18-11. Instrument racks at the Ormond Beach Power Plant near Point
Mugu.
18-18
10446175
Figure 18-12. Instrument racks at the Humboldt Bay Power Plant (upper
photograph) and El Centro Steam Plant in the Imperial Valley (lower
photograph).
18-19
10446175
Figure 18-13. Instrument racks at Las Ventanas Power Plant {upper
photograph) and at Las Ventanas Copper Refinery {lower photograph). Both
facilities were affected by the 1985 Chile Earthquake.
18-20
10446175
Figure 18-14. The Caxton Paper Mill includes several instrument racks
with components such as Rosemount transmitters (upper photograph) and
mercoid switches (lower photograph). The instruments were undamaged
during the 1987 New Zealand Earthquake.
10446175
18-21
Figure 18-15. Pneumatic-to-electric transmitters at the Puente Hills
Landfill Facility (upper photograph) and at the City of Commerce Refuse-
to-Energy Plant (lower photograph). The instruments and their supporting
structure were not damaged by the 1987 Whittier Earthquake.
18-22
10446175
Figure 18-16. Fisher and Rosemount transmitters at the Mesquite Lake
Resource Recovery Plant. These instruments were not damaged by the 1987
Superstition Hills Earthquake.
18-23
10446175
RESET ADJUSTMENT
Courtesy Fisher
Figure 18-17. At the New Zealand Distillery, which experienced an

estimated PGA of 0.50g during the 1987 New Zealand Earthquake, a pneumatic
relay within a Fisher level controller actuated. The relay actuation was
apparently caused by a pressure surge from liquid sloshing into the piping
feeding the controller. The pneumatic controller was undamaged and
returned to service following a manual reset of the relay.
18-24
10446175
SZ-8I
...... 0" "T1 NUMBER OF INSTRUMENTS ON RACKS

~ SlJ ......
C.V>tC ~ ~
-'•CD S:::
(') -s 0 U'l 0 U'l
l:lJ·l:lJ CD 0
c+V>
CD ...... 1\)
Ormond Beach Power Plant
C..l:lJ(X) 0
i!: !l!iiiiiliii~l~~i.($i~ili~iiitit~-~~~'
I
......, ...... Ul
S:::(X)
::::s •
(')
c+
...... Vl
OCD
''i IIBiisllll]l]jl Adak Naval Station
::::s .......
CD
0(')
......, c+
Las Ventanas Power Plant, Copper Refinery
CD
tC c.. .,
j ~;~:;2ower ~am
-s
0 ...... m
s:::::::s l>
::::S<
C. CD
3<+
00
::::s "'::c
G)
c-+-s 0
-'•'< c:
0 z
.
::so......, 0
l>
l>::::S 0
....... Vl 0
....... c+ m
1:
-s r- IBM \Santa Teresa Facility
-'•S::: m
::::S3 ::c
V>CD
c+ ::::s l> 0 ed Facility
g.>c-+ --4
~ = ey Steam Plant
::::SV> 0 0
(')
CDO
Vl::::S
z
...... Ul
-s-s
CDl:lJ
Vl(')
l>
<
m
::c
llllflfl El Centro Steam Plant
S:::7'
....... Vl l>
c+ G)
-'•:E
::::s ...... m
tC c+ :I:
...... :::T
--'· 0
::c
::::s::::s
....... c+ N 0
O::T 0
V>CD
Vl
z ~ New Zealand Distillery
--4 Ul
Vl l>
OCD
......, ...... r-
......
Vl
......,3
s::: ......
::::S(')
(')
c-+CD
-'•X
0"0
::SeD
-s
g.> ......
-seD
CD::::S
(') 0
CD en
0
' ? ' Union Oil, Main Oil. Shell Water Plants
c.
g.> Ul
c+
g.>
10446175
10446175
Section 19
TEMPERATURE SENSORS
This equipment class includes thermocouples and resistance temperature detectors

(RTDs) that are typically mounted within piping or tanks and measure fluid
temperature.

Thermocouples are probes consisting of two dissimilar metal wires that produce a
voltage output proportional to the difference in temperature between the hot
junction and the lead wires (cold junction). Resistance Temperature Detectors
(RTDs) are similar in construction to thermocouples. RTD operation is based on
the variation in electrical resistance with changes in temperature.
The sensing element in a thermocouple consists of two wires of dissimilar alloys,

routed through a stainless steel tube or sheath filled with insulating material.
The wires connect at the tip of the sheath in one of three types of junctions:
exposed, grounded, or ungrounded junctions.
An exposed junction links the wires beyond the tip of the protective sheath, so
that the junction is immersed in the fluid to be monitored. Thermocouples with
exposed junctions provide the fastest response time in sensing temperature
changes; however, the fluid must be static and noncorrosive to the exposed
sensor. In corrosive fluids or fluids under high flow rates or pressures, the
junction contained within the sheath is either a grounded or ungrounded junction.
A grounded junction makes electrical contact with the inside surface of the
sheath, while an ungrounded junction is isolated from the sheath wall.
Ungrounded junctions are used in fluids which have the potential for affecting
the electrical signal generated by the element. Isolating the element
electrically from the sheath wall also isolates it thermally; therefore, the
grounded junction has the longest response time.
19-1
10446175
The sensing element in an RTD consists of an electrical resistance element,
normally made of platinum wire, embedded in the tip of the protective sheath.
Both RTDs and thermocouples include the components listed below

(Figure 19-1):
• The connection head projects from the pipe or tank and contains the
terminal block for the connection of signal leads to the
transmitter
• A threaded fitting to the pipe or tank
• The sheath or protective tube extends into the fluid being
monitored
• Attached wires carry the signal from the sensor to a nearby
instrument (typically rack-mounted}
Temperature sensors generally range from one to two feet in length and weigh
under two pounds.
Equipment Anchorage
RTDs and thermocouples are connected to pressure vessel boundaries (piping,
tanks, heat exchangers, etc.) using threaded joints. The sensor's sheath will
often be inserted into a thermowell or outer protective tube that is permanently
mounted in the pipe or tank (Figure 19-1}. A thermowell allows the thermocouple
or RTD to be removed without breaking the pressure boundary of the pipe or tank.
Sensors are typically linked to transmitters mounted on nearby instrument racks,
which amplify the electronic signal generated in the sensors, and transmit the
signal to a remote instrument readout. Thermocouples or RTDs are commonly found
in power plants and large industrial facilities within the data base. Primary
piping for power or industrial plants typically includes several temperature
sensors at various points along the fluid flow path.
Nuclear Plant Applications

RTDs and thermocouples are used in all nuclear plant piping systems and tanks
where temperature monitoring is critical. This includes, for example, the
19-2
10446175
primary coolant system, the main steam system, and the main feedwater system.
Examples of nuclear plant temperature sensors are presented in Figure 19-2.
19.2 DATA BASE REPRESENTATION FOR TEMPERATURE SENSORS

Figures 19-3 through 19-9 present examples of sensors within the data base. The
data base inventory of sensors includes about 100 documented examples,
base. Of this inventory, there is one instance of damage to the electrical leads
of temperature sensors during an earthquake.
Figure 19-10 presents a bar chart that illustrates the inventory of sensors
documented at various data base sites as a function of their estimated PGA.
The general bounds of data base representation for the equipment class of sensors
Thermocouples and RTDs represented in the data base are located at all elevations
within a structure and mounted on various sizes of piping and tanks. Sensors
monitoring both heating and cooling systems are represented, covering a wide
range of operating temperatures and pressures.
• Connection head
• Threaded fitting
• Sheath or protective tube
• Thermowell
• Attached electrical connections

19-3
10446175
Mechanical systems within the plant include temperature sensors such as those
attached directly to the boiler (Figure 19-3, upper photograph}, and those
attached to the main steam lines. Temperature sensors were undamaged by the
earthquake.
mile of the plant.
Mechanical systems within the plant include temperature sensors such as those
mounted on the main steam lines of each of the plant's four units (Figure 19-4).
The temperature sensors were undamaged by the earthquake.

approximately 0.60g, with strong motion occurring for about 15 seconds during the
The plant contains two cryogenic chillers, each with at least four temperature
sensors (Figure 19-5). The temperature sensors were undamaged by the earthquake.

The experience data base contains one instance of seismic damage to temperature
sensors. At Las Ventanas Copper Refinery, affected by the 1985 earthquake in
Chile, three thermocouples were damaged in the plant boilers. The plant
operators attributed the damage to either differential displacement between
building structures or to impact from falling debris.
No additional instances of seismically induced damage to sensors or attached

tubing and wiring were found in an extensive literature search/telephone survey.

The seismic experience data base indicates that temperature sensors possess
19-4
10446175
exception of seismic spatial interaction effects, the experience data base
includes no instances of seismic damage to temperature sensors.
19.5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Omega Engineering, Incorporated. 1983. Complete Temperature Measurement
Handbook.
2. Honeywell Incorporated. 1979. "Thermocouples: Assemblies, Components,
Wire."
3. Conax Buffalo Corporation. 1981. "Seals for Wires and Probes."
Temperature Sensors and Assemblies.
19-5
10446175
Connection Head With Extended Cover
Bayonet Spring Loaded Sensor
------ Sensor @ Length -------------
I
I
3/4"- 14NPT
On Thermcwell
Figure 19-1. Typical temperature sensors that utilize either RTD or

thermocouple elements.
19-6
10446175
Figure 19-2. Temperature sensors in nuclear plant applications
19-7
10446175
Figure 19-3. Temperature sensors at the Valley Steam Plant {upper
photograph) and at the Burbank Power Plant {lower photograph).
19-8
10446175
Figure 19-4. Temperature sensors at El Centro Steam Plant. The sensors
were undamaged by the 1979 Imperial Valley Earthquake.
19-9
10446175
Figure 19-5. There are eight temperature sensors associated with the
cryogenic chillers at the Union Oil Butane Plant in Coalinga. All were
undamaged by the 1983 sequence of earthquakes.
19-10
10446175
Figure 19-6. Temperature sensors at the Burbank Power Plant, affected by
the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake.
19-11
10446175
Figure 19-7. Temperature sensors at the Glendale Power Plant, affected by
the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake (upper photograph) and at the Humboldt
Bay Power Plant, affected by the 1975/1980 Humboldt earthquakes (lower
photograph).
19-12
10446175
Figure 19-8. Temperature sensors at Power Plant Number 3 at Adak Naval
Station, affected by the 1986 Adak, Alaska Earthquake.
10446175
19-13
Figure 19-9. Temperature sensors at the Puente Hills Landfill Facility.
The units were undamaged by the 1987 Whittier Earthquake.
19-14
10446175
'E
Cl:l
15 a:
:
m "'
>.
....
Q)
c
: q::
Q)
0:
: ....
en
a:
0
en -a:
c :( 8.a.0
-
Cl:l
z
w 10
0
.... "i -~
en
w
Q)
:;: Cl:l rl@ ~ c
Cl:l
c
:::>
a: 0 a:.... m Q)
:;: 0:::
::J n. 0 E ]
-
Q)
-
1- .c n.
:;: cCl:l Cl:l
....0>.
......
c.t
a:
w
0..
~
~
()
Cl:l
ti~l ~
(/)
Cl:l a:....
c
Cl:l
~
Cl:l
.0
....
0:::
E
Q)
C/)
0
....
:•••••
- ()
Cl:l
-
"0
c LL
0.0
w § Cl:l ~
Cl:l
Q)
'E Q)
I
..... 1-
E
Q)
:;: Ci5 0
Q)
0
Ill~
U"'
u. .... 0
.c
(j)
0
5
0 n. } } >. jjj
~ .....Cl:l
a:
w
~ a; rs
lXI · ·:• j
Cl:l
"0 > ~
~ c
~
I
::J •••••••••.;:::::':':':1
z /{;11··· (!) :·····
••••••
~
0.20g
I····••••••t••·••··•••·•
1
I
••••
··:•:•:
0.30g
}
t
0.40g
{•
....
0.50g
(
•••••••
0.60g
.......
IN·SENS 40010.04 SQUG·20 CLASSES

Figure 19-10. Selected inventory of temperature sensors within the seismic experience data
indicated.
10446175
10446175
Section 20
CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION PANELS AND CABINETS
Control and instrumentation panels and cabinets include all types of electrical
panels that support instrumentation and controls. This equipment class includes
both the sheet metal enclosure and typical control and instrumentation components
mounted inside.

Control and instrumentation panels and cabinets are represented in the experience
data base by a wide diversity of sizes, types, functions, and components. The
sections below present a general description of the variety of examples in the
data base. The structure of the panel enclosure will be discussed, followed by a
description of typical control and instrumentation components.
Enclosures
Control and instrumentation panel and cabinet structures generally consist of a
steel frame supporting sheet metal panels to which control and instrumentation
components are bolted or clamped. Cabinet structures range from a single panel,
braced against or built into a wall, to a free-standing cabinet enclosure.
Enclosures are generally categorized as either switchboards or benchboards. The
general types of enclosures are discussed below.
A vertical switchboard is a single reinforced sheet metal panel supporting

components, which is either braced against an adjacent wall or built into it.
Examples of vertical switchboards are shown in Figure 20-1.
An enclosed switchboard is a free-standing enclosed sheet metal cabinet with

components mounted on the front face, and possibly to the interior walls. The
front or rear panel is hinged as a single or double swinging door to allow access
to the interior. Most wall- or rack-mounted cabinets can be categorized as
enclosed switchboards. Examples are shown in Figure 20-2.
20-1
10446175
A dual switchboard consists of two vertical panels braced against each other to
form a free-standing structure, with components mounted to both front and· rear
panels. The sides are usually open, and the front and rear panels are joined by
cross members spanning between their tops. Examples are shown in Figure 20-3.
A duplex switchboard is similar to a dual switchboard, except that it consists of

a panel fully enclosed by sheet metal on all sides, with access through doors in
the two side walls. Components are mounted on both front and rear panels, and
sometimes to internal racks or interior panels. The top may be either open or
closed. Examples are shown in Figure 20-4.
A control desk has components mounted on the desk top, and interior access
through swinging doors in the rear. A control room layout often places a control
desk in the center, facing an array of switchboards. Examples are shown in
Figure 20-5.
A benchboard is a single panel with the lower half consisting of a desk console.
The single panel is similar to a vertical switchboard and is normally braced
against or built into a wall. Examples are shown in Figure 20-6.
A dual benchboard is similar to a dual switchboard, with front and rear panels
supporting components. The lower half of the front panel is a desk console.
Examples are shown in Figure 20-7.
A duplex benchboard is similar to a duplex switchboard, a totally enclosed panel,

but with a desk console in the lower half of the front panel. Examples are shown
in Figure 20-8.
Control and instrumentation panel and cabinet enclosures normally consist of

steel angles, channels, or square tubes welded together, with sheet metal siding
attached by spot welds. Large panels are typically made of individual sections
bolted together through adjoining framing. The cabinet may or may not include a
sheet metal floor or ceiling.
Enclosure Anchorage
Floor-mounted panels or cabinets are normally anchored with bolts through the
bottom channel of the cabinet framing or with welds to embedded steel. Wall-
20-2
10446175
mounted cabinets are typically anchored with expansion bolts directly into
concrete walls, or with bolts to Unistrut members anchored to the wall with
expansion bolts. Examples of various types of control panel anchorage are
illustrated in Figures 20-9 through 20-12.
Components
The seismic experience data base includes a wide variety of control panel
components in its power, industrial, and commercial facilities. The focus of
this section is most common types of control and instrumentation components that
are also found in nuclear plant applications. Typical components of control and
instrumentation panels and cabinets include:
• Switches, push buttons, and panel lights (Figure 20-13)

• Indicators, annunciators, gauges, and meters (Figures 20-14 through
20-16}
• Recorders (rotating drum or strip chart) (Figure 20-17)
• Relays (including electromechanical relays) (Figure
20-18}
• Controllers (Figures 20-19 and 20-20)
• Solid-state circuit boards (Figure 20-21)
• Power supplies (transformers)
• Tubing, wiring, and terminal blocks (Figure 20-22)
Nearly all data base facilities, whether the plant is based primarily on
pneumatic or electronic control systems, include examples of these components in
their main control panels.
In the 1970s, control and instrumentation systems became primarily electronic,

rather than pneumatic. The development of electronic control systems since that
time has introduced a wide diversity of data processing components into control
and instrumentation panels. The basic building blocks of these components are
circuit cards with attached solid-state devices (e.g., transistors). In general,
these electronic components are of much lighter construction than the older
components serving pneumatic systems. They would therefore exhibit different
sources of seismic weakness, as illustrated in the discussions below of seismic
effects observed in more modern data base facilities.
20-3
10446175
Component Anchorage
In general, control and instrumentation components are either bolted to interior
panels or framing, or attached to the front or rear face of the cabinet through
penetrations in the sheet metal. Components mounted through penetrations in the
sheet metal are usually supported from a flange on the front of the component
that presses on the front face of the panel. The component is anchored with
screws or with the clamping force of threaded toggle bars that compress the
flange against the panel face. Components are normally supported only by this
flange mounting, with the body of the component cantilevered into the cabinet
interior. Examples of these types of component anchorage are shown in Figure
20-23.
Electronic components in the newer data base facilities are often bolted to
internal frames or racks of light steel angles. The attachment of components to
the frames is typically by screws through a flange surrounding the component
front face, as illustrated in Figure 20-24.
Some newer vintage components are not positively attached to the cabinet
structure, but instead slide into a rack or enclosure which is secured to the
cabinet. (Positive attachments for these components are sometimes provided but
are often not used due to the frequency of operator access to the component.)
Examples include the strip chart recorders shown in Figure 20-25, and the circuit
boards shown in Figure 20-26. As discussed below, the lack of positive
attachment has led, in a few cases, to components sliding out of their panels,
with subsequent damage at one data base site.
Control and instrumentation panels and cabinets create a centralized location for
the control and monitoring of electrical and mechanical systems. In general, all
data base facilities have a central control room with one or more main control
panels that monitor and control the plant. In addition to main control panels,
local control and instrumentation panels are sometimes distributed throughout the
facilities, close to the systems they serve.

Normally only a small portion of the components on a nuclear plant main control
panel are critical for safe shutdown. The critical systems typically depend on
20-4
10446175
the type and vintage of the reactor. Examples include components for monitoring
and controlling insertion of the control rods, primary coolant temperature and
pressure, primary coolant system isolation, auxiliary feedwater injection (in
PWRs), pressure vessel steam condensation (in BWRs), and emergency electric power
systems.
In general, these critical nuclear systems require the same type of controls and
instrumentation found in data base facilities of the same vintage. They are
mounted in enclosures whose construction has shown little variation over the last
40 years. Examples of nuclear plant control panels are presented in Figure 20-
27.
20.2 DATA BASE REPRESENTATION FOR CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION PANELS

AND CABINETS
The diversity of types of control and instrumentation panels and cabinets found
in the data base are best illustrated by the photographs presented in Figures 20-
1 to 20-26 and Figures 20-28 to 20-43. The data base inventory of control and
instrumentation panels and cabinets includes about 100 examples of large, floor-
mounted units. A larger inventory of local control panels, both floor-mounted
and rack- or wall-mounted, is included in the data base, for which an accurate
count cannot be made. There are control and instrumentation panels ·at nearly
every data base site in each of the earthquakes investigated. Each control panel
contains from dozens to hundreds of components. The total inventory of
components is therefore on the order of 10,000.
Of this inventory of control panels, there are several instances of anchorage

damage or minor structural damage in control panels, and eight sites where
instances of damage to control panel components affected functionality.
Figure 20-44 presents a bar chart that illustrates the inventory of control and
instrumentation panels and cabinets at various data base sites as a function of
their estimated peak ground acceleration.
The general bounds of data base representation for the equipment class of control
and instrumentation panels and cabinets are summarized below.
20-5
10446175
Electronic or pneumatic control or instrumentation devices attached to sheet
metal panels or within sheet metal cabinets are represented in panel sizes
ranging from wall- or rack-mounted enclosures to full-sized multi-section main
control panels.
Data base representation includes, among others, the following elements:
• The sheet metal enclosure

• Switches, push buttons, and panel lights
• Indicators, annunciators, gauges, and meters
• Recorders (rotating drum or strip chart}
• Relays (including electromechanical ~elays}
• Controllers
• Solid-state circuit boards
• Power supplies
• Tubing, wiring, and terminal blocks

The Svlmar Converter Station is one of the major power facilities reviewed in the
Fernando Earthquake, is estimated to have experienced at least 0.50g PGA, with
about ten seconds of strong motion.
The control room of the station includes a duplex switchboard which serves as the
main control panel (Figure 20-28}. The panel includes annunciators, recorders,
push buttons, and pilot lights on the front face and electronic relays on the
back·face. During the earthquake, the cbntrol room ceiling collapsed onto the
control panel. Neither the panel nor its components were damaged.
20-6
10446175
The plant has two control rooms, located on the turbine deck (20 feet above
grade). In each control room, there are several control panels with combined
electric and pneumatic instrumentation (Figure 20-29). There was no damage to
control and instrumentation panels (or their components) in the earthquake.

The main control panel is a dual switchboard which includes annunciators,

recorders, and a programmable controller (Figure 20-30). The unit is anchored
with six 5/8-inch bolts. During the earthquake, the anchor bolts were stretched
as much as 1/2 inch. The anchorage did not fail although the cabinet experienced
excessive rocking. In addition, recorders mounted in the front face of the
cabinet slid out of their drawer enclosures. The recorders did not fall and were
not damaged. There was no damage to control and instrumentation panels (or their
components) in the 1983 earthquake.
estimated to be 15 seconds.
The facility includes four wall-mounted switchboards (Figure 20-31). The main
control panel is anchored with friction clips. During the earthquake, the
cabinet slipped its anchorage and slid several inches. There was no damage to
control and instrumentation panels (or their components) in the 1983 earthquake.
in the station switchyard, as well as in the basement, operating floor, and on
the roof of the station building. The monitor located in the switchyard (free-
20-7
10446175
field) recorded an average peak ground acceleration of 0.56g with strong motion
of about 15 seconds.
The plant houses nine large vertical pumps. Each pump has an individual control
panel adjacent to the motor on the operating floor (Figure 20-32). Each panel
contains an array of annunciators, ammeters, wattmeters, voltmeters, push
buttons, and rotary switches on the front face. The interior of each panel
contains a 4160 volt air circuit breaker, mounted on rollers, several electrical
relays, and molded case circuit breakers. The back wall of each panel contains
an array of overcurrent, undervoltage, and voltage differential relays. During
the main earthquake, falling light fixtures impacted an ammeter and broke its
glass face. There was no significant damage to control and instrumentation panel
components during the earthquake.
Pumping Plant toward the epicenters of the 1983 Coalinga swarm of earthquakes.
applicable to the Union Oil and Main Oil plants is applicable here.
The plant's main control panel includes annunciators, recorders, and a variety of
push buttons and pilot lights (Figure 20-33). During the earthquake, several
recorders, which did not have their mounting screws engaged, slid out of their
mounting drawers but were not damaged. There was no damage to control and
instrumentation panels (or their components) in the 1983 earthquake.

The experience data base contains several instances of seismic effects to control
and instrumentation panels and cabinets and their components.
Spurious actuation of electromechanical relays, mounted in relay racks or control

panels, has affected several facilities in the experience data base. These
facilities include: Valley Steam Plant, Burbank Power Plant, Concon Petroleum
Refinery, San Isidro Substation, San Sebastian Substation, El Infiernillo
Hydroelectric Plant, and La Villita Hydroelectric Plant.
At the Union Oil Butane Plant, affected by the 1983 Coalinga Earthquake,
excessive rocking in the main control panel caused the anchor bolts to be
20-8
10446175
stretched about 1/2 inch {Figure 20-30). In addition, several recorders mounted
in the front face of the panel slid in and out of their drawers several times
during the event. The recorders extended from the front face of the panel, but
did not fall and were not damaged. The recorders in the drawers had end stops,
which prevented them from falling out.
At the Main Oil Pumping Plant, affected by the 1983 Coalinga Earthquake, the main
control panel slipped from its anchor clips and slid several inches {Figure 20-
31). The cabinet received paint scratches from impact with adjacent walls and
cabinets, but the components were undamaged.
In addition, several drawer-mounted circuit boards {Figure 20-21) were knocked

out of a telecommunications equipment rack when a glass panel that happened to be
stored behind the rack overturned and struck the rack. The circuit boards were
reported as undamaged once they were replaced in the rack.
At the Coalinga Water Treatment Plant, affected by the 1983 Coalinga Earthquake,
recorders mounted in the main control panel slid from their drawers. As was the
case at the Union Oil plant, the recorders did not fall and were not damaged.
The control panel also contained a meter {Figure 20-33) which was found to be
inoperable following the main shock. Dismantling of the meter revealed a burned
coil inside. The burned coil appeared to have been caused by an electrical
fault, most likely a current surge during the earthquake before the loss of off-
site power. The cause of the electrical fault was unknown. It might have
resulted from an internal short circuit in the meter, a surge in the circuit
supplying the meter, or even a surge in the plant's power supply from its 4160
volt unit substation.
At the San Juan de Llolleo Pumping Plant, affected by the 1985 Chile Earthquake,
the porcelain base of a 480 volt circuit breaker fractured in the main control
panel. The breaker and its mounting configuration are not typical of modern
power plant applications.
At Las Ventanas Power Plant, affected by the 1985 Chile Earthquake, a tall and
narrow control room mimic display cabinet experienced severe rocking, pulling its
lead sleeve expansion anchors and distorting the panel frame. The panel was
20-9
10446175
operational once it was reanchored and braced. A second panel pulled four 3/8-
inch anchor bolts (embedded only 3/4 inch) and slid 1 inch. In addition, the
main control panel (a duplex walk-in benchboard, supported on shock-isolation
mounts) sustained minor structural damage in the form of loosened anchor bolts, a
deformed steel baseplate, and fracture of a weld in the cabinet framing. In all
cases, control and instrumentation components remained operational following the
earthquake.
At the San Isidro Substation, affected by the 1985 Chile Earthquake, the
emergency control panel pulled its expansion anchor bolts. The panel remained
operational. In addition, the supervisory control system and communication
panels, which were anchored, shifted during the earthquake. Many of the anchor
bolts were loosened and some were damaged. The panel components remained
operational.
At the Concan Petroleum Refinery, affected by the 1985 Chile Earthquake, the main
control panel, a vertical switchboard which extends along the perimeter of the
" control room, broke many of the horizontal braces between the top of the panel
and the building wall. In addition, a drawer-type Foxboro strip chart recorder
pulled out from the control panel in the processing plant. The recorder did not
fall and was not damaged.
At the Bata Shoe Factory, affected by the 1985 Chile Earthquake, a few indicator·
lights (about l-inch diameter) in the control panels had to be replaced because
of broken filaments (Figure 20-34, upper photograph).
At the Rapel Hydroelectric Plant, which experienced a PGA of 0.40g during the
1985 Chile Earthquake, five relays and one strip chart recorder were damaged.
Three of the relays su~fered an internal short circuit when a spring in the
electric monitoring circuit vibrated, detached, touched ground, and burned. Two
other relays were damaged when their armatures exceeded their (rotational) range
of travel. The strip chart recorder, that was located adjacent to the relays,
spilled ink when its mounting bolts loosened.
At the SICARTSA Steel Mill, affected by the 1985 Mexico Earthquake, several
components slid out of the main control panel and the auxiliary instrumentation
monitoring panels and fell to the floor of the power plant control room. The
20-10
10446175
components were slide-in electronic controllers and recorders, typical in modern
power plant applications (similar to those shown in Figure 20-19, lower
photograph). The drawers had no end stops to prevent them from sliding out. In
addition, circuit boards slipped out of the instrumentation monitoring cabinets
(similar to those shown in Figure 20-21). These components are not positively
attached to the cabinet structure; they are allowed to slide freely into and out
of their drawer mounts ·for easy operator access. Damage to circuit cards from
heat and humidity was reported due to the loss of air conditioning in the control
room for several days following the earthquake.
At Devers Substation, affected by the 1986 North Palm Springs Earthquake, a

hinged panel at one end of the main control board swung into the front face of
the board, breaking the glass cover on a voltmeter. In spite of the broken
cover, the voltmeter remained operable.
In addition, minor burning of the internals was apparent in the solid-state

overcurrent relay (Figure 20-37). Following the earthquake, technicians
inspecting the switchboards within the 500 kV control house noticed the odor of
burned insulation coming from the relay. Subsequent tests showed that the relay
was still operable, but it was replaced as a precaution. Technicians voiced the·
opinion that failure of the 500 kV voltage transformers in the switchyard during
the earthquake might have produced a momentary current surge into the relay.
At the Hi-Head Hydroelectric Plant, affected by the 1986 Chalfant Valley

Earthquake, the facility's programmable controller was inoperable following the
earthquake. Apparently a ground wire was never adequately tightened (at the
factory}, and movement of the wire during the earthquake created a short circuit.
Four facilities which were affected by the 1987 New Zealand Earthquake suffered
seismic effects to control and instrumentation cabinets. The details of the
seismic damage are discussed below.
At the Kawerau Substation, three control panels pulled their anchorage and
overturned. The anchorage damage was the result of yielding and tearing of the
thin gauge angles surrounding the bolt holes in the base of the cabinets. The
cabinet overturning was a cascading effect; one relay cabinet pulled its
anchorage and tipped, impacting two control panels in front as it overturned.
20-11
10446175
All three cabinets were prevented from completely overturning by the restraining
effect of cable connections at the rear. The only resulting damage was to the
glass face of a large ASEA relay on the relay cabinet. All components of the
panels were operable following the earthquake.
At the Edgecumbe Substation, located nearer to the earthquake's epicenter, three

rows of relay and instrumentation. cabinets in the control house overturned in a
similar cascading fashion. The cabinets were anchored with 3/8-inch coach bolts
screwed into wooden base plates. Each cabinet section (about 3 feet wide)
typically had one bolt in each of its four corners. Steel angles had been
provided between the three rows of cabinets as cross bracing; however, the cross
bracing was not tied back to the wall.
At the Whakatane Boards Mills, an unanchored instrumentation cabinet shifted

several inches, stretching and breaking a taut cable connection to a floor
penetration.
At the pulp mill associated with the Caxton Paper Mill, the hinged doors of the
electrical panels containing programmable controllers flew open during the
earthquake. The latches that secure the doors in place were missing when the
cabinets were installed; the doors were therefore unrestrained from swinging
open.
Instances of seismically induced damage to control and instrument panels are

known to have occurred at sites reviewed in an extensive literature
search/telephone survey. These sites are not included in the data base and few
details about the incidents are known. The most important examples are discussed
below. Instances of damage to large computers (typically from inadequate
anchorage) are not addressed here because computers are not included in this
equipment class.
Seismic damage to control and instrument panels from inadequate anchorage has
occurred at several sites, including those affected by the 1964 Anchorage, Alaska
Earthquake (including Anchorage Municipal Light and Power Plant and Elmendorf Air
Force Base), the 1968 lnangahua, New Zealand Earthquake (including Inangahua
Substation), the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake (including Olive View Hospital),
the 1972 Managua Earthquake {including the Telephone Building), the 1976
20-12
10446175
Guatemala Earthquake (including the Guatel Building), and the 1980 Greenville
Earthquake (including Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory).

The seismic experience data base indicates that control and instrumentation
panels and cabinets possess characteristics which generally preclude damage in
earthquakes. The few instances of seismic effects demonstrate the following
seismic vulnerabilities for control and instrumentation panels and cabinets.
• Anchorage. In cases where control panels are unanchored or poorly

anchored, the units have slid and, in other cases, overturned.
• Positive Attachment of Slide-In Components. Slide-in components
(e.g., strip chart recorders and circuit boards) have slid out of
their drawer mounts at several data base sites, in some cases
falling to the floor.
• Electrical Faults. Earthquake-related current surges have burned
control panel internals (e.g., coils and insulation) at several
data base sites.
• Spurious Relay Actuation. Spurious actuation of relays has had
undesirable effects at several data base sites.
20.5 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Robertshaw Controls Company. n.d. "Pneumatic Recording Flow Controller,
BF-100 Series." Product Specification PS BF-100.
2. Bently Nevada Corporation. 1988-89. "Rotating Machinery Information
Systems and Services." 1988-89 Catalog.
3. Honeywell Incorporated. December 1983. "Servoline: Honeywell's Versatile
Line of Circular Chart Recorder/Controllers." Process Control Division.
4. General Electric Company. June 1980. "Switchboard Instruments."
Technical Information Series.
5. The Babcock & Wilcox Company. 1986. "Bailey PC-90 Programmable Controller
System." Technical Overview.
6. Stacoswitch, Incorporated. 1978. "Lighted Display Pushbutton Switches."
Design Catalog GC-6/3.
7. Honeywell Incorporated. September 1981. Condensed Catalog.
8. International Instruments. 1968. "Series 2547/2548 Electronic Control
Meters."
10446175
20-13
9. International Instruments. n.d. "Verigraph: Solid-State 3-1/2" Edgewise
Panel Meter/Meter Relay."
10. McDermott Incorporated. 1981. "Electrical Edgewise Indicator Type RY."
Product Specification E12-9.
11. Micro Switch. n.d. "Oiltight Manual Controls." Catalog 70, Issue 6.
12. Square D Company. 1983. "Type P Micro Computer Based Digital
Timer/Counter."
13. Kompass, E. J. August 1981. "A Long Perspective on Integrated Process
Control Systems." Control Engineering. Second edition. Vol. 28, No. 9.
14. Elliott, T. C. September 1975. "Key Measurements in Power and Process."
Power. Special Report.
15. Peach, N. August 1961. "Protective Relaying For Industrial Electric-
Distribution Systems." Power. Special Report.
20-14
10446175
Figure 20-1. Vertical switchboards at the Devers Substation near Palm
Springs {upper photograph) and at the Drop IV Hydroelectric Plant (lower
photograph).
20-15
10446175
........
...
. :t.'
;
_,'::::..:.
~
.........
... ,. ...
.
.t ··\
. :;::. .
•'
Figure 20-2. Enclosed switchboards at the Sylmar Converter Station in the

San Fernando Valley (upper photograph) and at the Main Oil Pumping Plant
in Coalinga (lower photograph).
20-16
10446175
Figure 20-3. Dual switchboards at El Centro Steam Plant in the Imperial
Valley (upper photograph) and at the Goleta Substation in Santa Barbara
(lower photograph).
10446175
20-17
Figure 20-4. Duplex switchboards at El Centro Steam Plant in the Imperial
Valley (upper photograph) and at the Gates Substation in Coalinga (lower
photograph).
20-18
10446175
Figure 20-5. Control desks at the Goleta Substation in Santa Barbara
(upper photograph) and at the Sylmar Converter Station in the San Fernando
Valley (lower photograph).
20-19
10446175
Figure 20-6. Benchboards at the Pasadena Power Plant in the San Fernando
Valley (upper photograph) and at the Rapel Hydroelectric Plant in Chile
(lower photograph).
20-20
10446175
Figure 20-7. Dual benchboards at the Fertimex Power Plant in Mexico
(upper photograph) and at the Concon Water Treatment Plant in Chile (lower
photograph).
20-21
10446175
Figure 20-8. Duplex benchboards at the Burbank Power Plant in the San
Fernando Valley (upper photograph) and at Las Ventanas Power Plant in
Chile (lower photograph).
20-22
10446175
Figure 20-9. An example of welded anchorage is illustrated by the Sylmar
Converter Station main control panel (upper photograph), where the base
channel is anchored to floor-embedded steel with short welds (arrow, lower
photograph).
20-23
10446175
Figure 20-10. The anchorage of this duplex switchboard at the Valley
Steam Plant consists of 1/2-inch expansion anchors through brackets welded
to the bottom angle framing of the control panel.
20-24
10446175
Figure 20-11. The anchorage of this duplex benchboard at the Burbank
Power Plant consists of 1/2-inch bolts cast into the supporting concrete
sill.
20-25
10446175
Figure 20-12. The anchorage of these enclosed switchboards at the
Matahina Hydroelectric Plant in New Zealand consists of bolt connections
into Unistrut runners that are, in turn, anchored to the floor with 3/8-
inch expansion bolts (arrow, lower photograph).
20-26
10446175
\&,•
I
Courtesy General Electric
Figure 20-13. Rotary switches, panel lights, and meters mounted in

control panels at the Valley Steam Plant are illustrated in the upper
photographs (front panel view in the right photograph, interior view in
the left photograph). Component size, shape, and mounting details are
illustrated in the lower photographs and sketches.
20-27
10446175
r I /4-28 NF-2A THO
r-:-~. ---,,
6. 041J
r· i 1II
1
!~'~' ~~@1
MAX
i I I
t t
J :
I '1 I
•
REF I
I
I
I ' :
_ ~ I :'@1@)
II 6 54 2 : ! I
r-
. 7~~
MLj'
--j
WJ{I
MA~ I 776
MAX
r-
Figure 20-14. Indicators mounted to the main control panel at the Devers
Substation are illustrated in the upper photographs (front panel view in
the left photograph, interior view in the right photograph). The sketch
shows the typical indicator size and mounting detail.
20-28
10446175
r----- A
~ 't!! • 't!! . ©
. 't!! 't!!
.:
p = p == 91F' = = =
I
I
=rll::c =:clb:::: =:clb:::: 6:1!r =x1i:d
p ANEL THICKNESS: REMOVABLE COVER FOR
----- .9ff FIELD WIRING

~MIN
l lf lf II II 1· MAX
]~--- ~
c
D D D D D r~
D D D D'D 1 0
DDDDD
DDDDD
Figure 20-15. Annunciators, both enclosure-mounted and panel-mounted, are

illustrated by these examples from the Union Oil Plant (front panel view
in the upper right photograph, interior view in the upper left
photograph}, and the Humboldt Bay Power Plant (lower photograph). The
sketch shows typical sizes and mounting details for a panel-mounted
annunciator assembly.
20-29
10446175
Cod Tout bood
Oomp11'1Q V'QI'If Center stop
Construction of Type AB-40 a-c voltmeters

and ammeters
Terminal screws 10-32 thread

4 mounting studs 1/4"-28 thread
Panel
Side view of AB-16, -30,-40,-41 a-c ammeters and voltmeters
Figure 20-16. Ammeters, voltmeters, wattmeters, and frequency meters

mounted in the control panel of the Pleasant Valley Pumping Plant are
illustrated in the photographs (front panel view in the upper left
photograph, interior view in the lower right photograph). The sketches
illustrate the size, mounting, and operation of typical meters.
20-30
10446175
Die-cast aluminum
cases and doors
Double thickness
glass windows
Chip-resistant,
no-glare, black finish
Fluorescent light
Swing-up scale
Specially designed
flush hinges and
latch
High reflectance
white interior
Gasket-sealed doors.
Panel mount case CH-1 or CH-2
(front view)
Inking recording mechanism available on all Type CH recorders lnkless recording mechanism; available on all Type CH
recorders except Type CH-37
Figure 20-17. Strip chart recorders mounted in control panels at the

Burbank Power Plant are illustrated in the upper left photograph. Details
of the recorder components are illustrated in the lower photographs.
20-31
10446175
Figure 20-18. Examples of various types of relays typically mounted in
control panels include industrial relays and contactors at the SICARTSA
Steel Mill (upper left photograph), general purpose compact relays at the
Devers Substation (upper right photograph), electromechanical protective
relays at the Glendale Power Plant (lower left photograph), and the
pneumatic timing relays at the Pleasant Valley Pumping Plant (lower right
photograph).
20-32
10446175
Courtesy Fisher-Porter
Derivative cut-off switch Proportional band adju,;tmen-r
Reset rate adjustment Derivative adjustment
Figure 20-19. Strip chart recorders, indicators, meters, and controllers

mounted in a control panel at the Fertimex Fertilizer Plant are
illustrated in the upper photographs (overall view of the panel in the
left photograph, close-up view of the components in the right photograph).
The lower photographs illustrate typical size, mounting details, and
construction of a strip chart recorder and a controller.
20-33
10446175
'"" __ _______________ ___ __
,,,, , ,
"
1( 11 lll
EXPANDER SUS
J} ll u )I f>ERS.ONAL
COMPUTER
WORt':
ST41"10N
LOOt> f!.US PROCESSOR ENHANCED LOGtC DIGITAl.. ANALOG ANA4.00 SEI\IAL

INTERrACE I~TERFACE MODULE MASTER MOOUtE SLAY€ MOO!JL£ MASTE:R MODULE SLAVE MOOOlf. PORT MOOULC:
MOOUtF. MODULE
1 1
OIGJTAL 110
1
TERMiNA'fiON
MODULE BAILEY PC-90 SYSTEM
ll ••! t •I
t
Figure 20-20. Programmable controllers are a recent innovation that has

totally changed the design of control panels. The basic components of one
type of controller frequently found at recent vintage sites are
illustrated in the schematic diagram at top. The lower photographs show
the enclosures for the central processing units (left photograph), and the
CRT monitor and control board (right photograph) at the Mesquite Lake
Resource Recovery Plant.
20-34
10446175
Courtesy Harris Corp.
Figure 20-21. Solid-state circuit boards are a standard component of most

control panel devices since the 1970s. Examples of special purpose
circuit boards that slide into their rack-mounted enclosure are
illustrated by the UHF communications system multiplexer at the Main Oil
Pumping Plant (upper left photograph). The rear of the rack was struck by
an overturning glass panel during the 1983 Coalinga Earthquake, knocking
several circuit boards out of their enclosure onto the floor. In spite of
the impact, the boards were reported as undamaged and operable once they
were reinserted in their enclosure.
20-35
10446175
,......,..
I
I
,·~
Figure 20-22. Typical control and instrumentation panel components

include tubing, wiring, and terminal blocks as shown at El Centro Steam
Plant in the Imperial Valley.
20-36
10446175
Figure 20-23. Control p~nel components are typically cantilevered from
the front face of the panel and attached by screws through the sheet
metal, as illustrated by the annunciator assembly at the Devers
Substation, shown in the upper photograph, or clamped by toggle bolts, as
illustrated by the strip chart recorders at the Main Oil Plant in the
lower photograph.
20-37
10446175
... J
.. ~
Figure 20-24. In some cases, control panel components are bolted to an

internal steel frame as shown at El Centro Steam Plant in the Imperial
Valley.
20-38
10446175
Figure 20-25. In some cases, components are not positively attached to
the control cabinet, but instead slide into a rack or enclosure that is
secured to the cabinet. These strip chart recorders at the Union Oil
Butane Plant in Coalinga (upper photograph) and SICARTSA Steel Mill in
Mexico (lower photograph) were not positively anchored and slid from their
drawers during the earthquake. In Coalinga, the components had end stops
and did not fall out; in Mexico they had no end stops, and fell to the
floor.
20-39
10446175
Figure 20-26. In some cases, components are not positively attached to
the control cabinet, but instead slide into a rack or enclosure that is
secured to the cabinet. These circuit cards at the SICARTSA Steel Mill
were not positively attached and slid from their drawers during the 1985
Mexico Earthquake.
20-40
10446175
Figure 20-27. Typical control and instrumentation panels in nuclear plant
appliaations.
20-41
10446175
Figure 20-28. The main control panel at the Sylmar Converter Station was
undamaged by the 1971 San Fernando Earthquake, even though the control
room ceiling collapsed onto it.
20-42
10446175
oo
'·> ·:
D!·····o-z;;rl'f~ifB0
~~~~ ........
·- -
Figure 20-29. El Centro Steam Plant includes several control and

instrumentation panels throughout the plant and in the two control rooms.
10446175
20-43
Figure 20-30. The main control panel at the Union Oil Butane Plant
suffered stretched anchor bolts as a result of the 1983 earthquake
sequence in Coalinga.
20-44
10446175
Figure 20-31. The Main Oil Pumping Plant includes four wall-mounted
switchboards. During the earthquake, t~e main control panel (lower
photograph) slipped its anchor clips and slid several inches.
20-45
10446175
-
Figure 20-32. The Pleasant Valley Pumping Station includes nine control
panels, one for each of its large vertical pumps.
20-46
10446175
Figure 20-33. The Coalinga Water Treatment Plant includes an enclosed
switchboard as the main control panel. During the Coalinga Earthquake,
several drawer-mounted strip chart recorders and meters slid out from the
front face of the panel. One meter (arrow, lower photograph) suffered a
burned coil, apparently due to an electrical fault.
10446175
20-47
•••
•••
:ecce
Figure 20-34. Control panels at the Bata Shoe Factory (upper photograph)
and the Oxiquim Chemical Plant (lower photograph). Both facilities were
20-48
10446175
Figure 20-35. Control panels at the Laguna Verde Power Plant (upper
photograph) and Las Condes Hospital (lower photograph). Both facilities
were affected by the 1985 Chile Earthquake.
20-49
10446175
Main control panel.
Auxiliary control panels.
Figure 20-36. Control panels at Devers Substation, affected by the

1986 North Palm Springs Earthquake.
20-50
10446175
Figure 20-37. One of several vertical switchboards in the 500 kV control
house of the Devers Substation is shown in the upper photograph. During
the earthquake, a hinged panel mounted at one end swung into the front
face of the board, impacting the adjacent edgewise indicators, and
breaking the glass covet on a frequency meter (arrow, center photograph).
The lower photograph shows an adjacent vertical supporting solid-state
relays. One overcurrent relay (arrow) appeared to have burned internals
following the earthquake, apparently due to a momentary current surge.
20-51
10446175
.I
Figure 20-38. The main control panel at the Whitewater Hydroelectric

Plant includes two General Electric programmable controllers. The control
panel and its components were undamaged by the 1986 North Palm Springs
Earthquake.
20-52
10446175
Figure 20-39. Control p9nels at power plants affected by the 1987 Cerro
Prieto Earthquake.
20-53
10446175
Figure 20-40. Control panels at the Del Amo Substation (upper photograph)
and the Olinda Substation (lower photograph) affected by the 1987 Whittier
Earthquake.
20-54
10446175
Figure 20-41. At the Kawerau Substation, affected by the 1987 New Zealand
Earthquake, three cabinets in the new control house failed their anchorage
and overturned. The rear cabinet impacted the two in front creating a
cascade effect. The cabinets were prevented from falling to the floor by
the restraining effect of stretched cable connections attached near their
rear face. Surprisingly, the only damage was to the glass over the large
ASEA relay mounted on the rear cabinet. Anchorage failure consisted of
tearing of the thin base channel surrounding the Unistrut bolts (lower
photograph).
20-55
10446175
Figure 20-42. At the Edgecumbe Substation, affected by the 1987 New
Zealand Earthquake, three rows of relay and instrument cabinets overturned
in the operating bay of the control house. The upper photograph shows the
cabinets following the earthquake, having been uprighted and provided with
temporary wooden bracing across the top. Cabinet overturning was caused
by pullout of the 1 centimeter (3/8 inch) wood screws anchoring the
cabinets into 4x4 beams embedded in the rim of the floor cable
penetrations (lower photograph).
20-56
10446175
Figure 20-43. At the Whakatane Board Mills, affected by the 1987 New
Zealand Earthquake, unanchored cabinets overturned (upper left photograph)
in the electrical equipment rooms located off the operating floor of Paper
Machine No. 3. Several slide-mounted drawers containing motor controllers
slid out of position in motor control centers (upper right photograph),
but were undamaged. Shifting of one unanchored instrumentation cabinet
broke a floor cable attachment which had insufficient slack to accommodate
the displacement (arrow, lower photograph, following repair).
20-57
10446175
* At the Coalinga Water Treatment Plant, current surges burned the Internal
coils of a meter.
•• At the Bata Shoe Factory, Indicator lights sustained broken filaments.

*** At the Repel Hydroelectric Plant, five relays and one strip chart recorder
were damaged.
**** At the SICARTSA Steel Mill, slide-In controllers, recorders, and circuit boards
slid o~t of the control panel and fell to the floor.
••••• At the Hi·Head Hydroelectric Plant, a programmable controller suffered
a short circuit.
•••••• At the Devers Substation, the Internals of a solid state relay burned.
Ul ******* At the Kawerau Substation, one panel pulled its anchorage and fell onto two
fJl c: other panels, knocking all three panels over.
Iii 15. .2
********
z "lii At the Edgecumbe Substation, three rows of panels pulled their anchorage
ii5
<1:
(.)
c
(ij
..0
:J
en
I and overturned.
Indicates a damaged unit.

·
z
<1:
fJl
..J
w
z
<1:
0..
z 10 .:
1'\)
0
I
U1
0
~
!zw
.:
c:
co .2
:;E "lii
:::> (ij
a: ..0
1- c: :J
m
z .2 en
"lii ~
~ 5. (ij
.c
Q)
>
<1: :J
Q)
0
..J
0
en
a: ra
"0
1-
z .!::
0
(.) 6
lL
0
a:
w
~0
:::>
z 0.20g 0.30g 0.40g 0.50g 0.60g o.aog 0.90g
Figure 20-44. Selected inventory of control and instrumentation panels and cabinets within the
seismic experience data base as a function of ground motion. All instances resulting in loss
of function are indicated.
10446175
Section 21
REFERENCES
1. Yanev, Peter I. and Sam W. Swan. September 1982. "Program for the
Development of an Alternative Approach to Seismic Equipment Qualification."
Summary and 2 Vols. San Francisco, CA: EQE Incorporated.
2. EQE Incorporated. December 1984. "Seismic Experience Data Base, Data Base
Tables for Eight Types of Equipment." Prepared for the Seismic
Qualification Utility Group (SQUG).
3. Senior Seismic Review and Advisory Panel (SSRAP). February 1984. "Use of
Past Earthquake Experience Data to Show Seismic Ruggedness of Certain
Classes of Equipment in Nuclear Power Plants." Prepared for the Seismic
Qualification Utility Group.
4. Chang, T. Y. August 1985. "Seismic Qualification of Equipment in
Operating Nuclear Power Plants." NUREG-1030. Washington, DC: U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
5. Chang, T. Y. September 1983. "Seismic Qualification of Equipment in
Operating Nuclear Power Plants, A Status Report on Unresolved Safety Issue
A-46." NUREG-1018. Washington, DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
6. Smith, P. D. and R. G. Dong. August 1983. "Correlation of Seismic
Experience Data in Non-Nuclear Facilities with Seismic Equipment
Qualification in Nuclear Plants (A-46)." NUREG/CR-3017. Prepared for U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory:
Livermore, CA.
7. Chang, T. Y. February 1987. "Regulatory Analysis for Resolution of
Unresolved Safety Issue A-46, Seismic Qualification of Equipment in
Operating Plants." NUREG 1211. Status Report, Unresolved Safety Issue A-
46. United States Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
8. Senior Seismic Review and Advisory Panel (SSRAP). February 28, 1991. "Use
of Seismic Experience Data and Test Data to Show Ruggedness of Equipment in
Nuclear Power Plants." Revision 4.0. Prepared for the Seismic
Qualification Utility Group.
10446175 21-1
LITERATURE SURVEY BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Abbott, C. D. June 1926. "The St. Lawrence Earthquake of February 28,

1925." Bu77etin of the Seismological Society of America 16: 133-145.
2. Acero Comerc1al S. A. n.d. "El S1smo del Marzo 1985 Ch1le."
3. Acero Comercial S. A. July 31, 1986. "El Sismo del 3 de Marzo 1985,
Chile." Universidad de Chile Facultad de Ciencias Fisicas y Matematicas.
4. Adams, R. D. December 1971. "An Immediate Field Survey of the San
Fernando, Los Angeles, Earthquake, February 9, 1971." Bu77etin of the New
Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering 4: 335-346.
5. Adams, R. D. n.d. "Preliminary Reports on the Inangahua Earthquake, New
Zealand, May 1968." Bulletin 193. New Zealand Department of Scientific
and Industrial Research.
6. Adams,· R. D., G. J. Lensen, C. M. Strachan, and H. R. Laws. 1970. "Seddon
Earthquake, New Zealand, April 1966." Bulletin 199. New Zealand
Department of Scientific and Industrial Research.
7. Adeli, H. March 1981. "Ghaenat (Iran) Earthquake of November 14, 1979."
Bulletin of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering 14.
8. Agrawal, P. N. November 10-12 1982. "Damage Due to Great Nicobar India
Earthquake of January 20, 1982." Proceedings of the Seventh Symposium on
Earthquake Engineering. Vol. 1. Delhi: Sarita Prakashan.
9. "Alaskan Electric Service Near Normal." May 1964. Electrical West 131,
No. 5.
10. Algermissen, S. T. and S. T. Harding. 1965. "The Puget Sound, Washington
Earthquake of April 29, 1965." Washington DC: United States Government
Printing Office.
11. Ambraseys, N. N. and A. Zatopek. February 1968. "The Varto-Osttikran
(Anatolia) Earthquake of 19 August 1966: Summary of a Field Report."
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 58.
12. American Concrete Institute. January 1986. "In the Wake of the Quake."
Concrete International: 9-12.
13. American Iron and Steel Institute. 1975. Earthquakes. Washington, DC.
21-2
10446175
14. American Iron and Steel Institute. 1973. "The Managua Earthquake of
December 23, 1972." Two papers from a Scientific Conference, San
Francisco, CA.
15. American Iron and Steel Institute, Committee of Structural Steel Producers.
1962. "The Agadir, Morocco Earthquake February 29, 1960." New York, NY.
16. American Plywood Association. 1971. "San Fernando Earthquake of February
9, 1971." Tacoma, WA.
17. American Society of Civil Engineers Council on Lifeline Earthquake
Engineering. 1983. "Advisory Notes on Lifeline Earthquake Engineering."
New York, NY.
18. American Society of Civil Engineers, Working Group on Past Behavior. n.d.
"The Effects of Earthquakes on Power and Industrial Facilities and
Implications for Nuclear Power Plant Design." New York, NY.
19. American Society of Civil Engineers. n.d. "Structural Design of Nuclear
Plant Facilities." Vol. 1.
20. Ammann, W. and B. Porro. September 20-25, 1982. "The Earthquake in
Southern Italy of 23 November 1980: Engineering Aspects and Interpretation
of Building Damage." Proceedings of the Seventh European Conference on
Earthquake Engineering. Vol. 1. Athens, Greece: 151-158.
21. Amrhein, J. E., S. E. Giron, and J. A. Giron. July/August 1983. "Long
Beach 1933 - Coalinga 1983 but With a Difference." Masonry Design West:
8-11.
22. Amrhein, J. E., W. L. Dickey, and R. S. Mclean. November 1975. "Oroville
Earthquake of August 1, 1975." Earthquake Engineering Reasearch Institute
Newsletter 9: 56-58.
23. Applied Nucleonics Company, Inc., Technical Staff. March 1973. "Damage
and Aftershock Survey at Ormond Beach Power Plant, 21 February 1973." Los
Angeles, CA.
24. "Are Earthquake Losses Unavoidable?" 1984. Schadenspiege7: Losses and
Loss Prevention. No 1: 101-109. Munich, West Germany.
25. Arias, S., V. Arze, and J. Bauza. January 13-18, 1969. "Repairs on Power
House and Boiler Support Structure Damaged by 1965 Earthquake. Ventanas
115 MW Steam Electric Station (Chile)." Proceedings of the Fourth World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Vol. 3. Santiago, Chile: 31-45.
26. Arnold, C. and M. Durkin. 1983. "Hospitals and the San Fernando
Earthquake." A Study by Building Systems Development, Inc., San Mateo, CA.
Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
27. Arnold, C., M. Durkin, R. Eisner, and D. Whitaker. 1982. "Imperial County
Services Building: Occupant Behavior and Operational Consequences as a
Result of the 1979 Imperial Valley Earthquake." Washington, DC: National
Science Foundation.
10446175
21-3
28. Arya, A. S., L. S. Srivastava, and S. P. Gupta. December 1984. "Damages
During Dhamar Earthquake of December 13, 1982 in Yemen Arab Republic."
Indian Society of Earthquake Technology 21,
No. 4: 115-162.
29. Ballard, J. I. March 23, 1933. "Building Damage Sustained in California
Earthquake." Engineering News-Record: 378-381.
30. Barksdale, J. D. and H. A. Coombs. October 1946. "The Puget Sound
Earthquake of February 1946." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of
America 36: 349-355.
31. Beca Carter Hollings & Ferner Ltd. May 14, 1987. Letter to
Mr. G. Wilkinson.
32. Beca Carter Hollings & Ferner Ltd. May 13, 1987. "Report on BCHF Site
Visit of 29 April 1987." Letter to Mr. G. Wilkinson.
33. Beca Carter Hollings & Ferner Ltd. March 9, 1987. "Report On-Site Visit
to New Zealand Distillery Co. Ltd." Visit by Mr. P. Agius and Mr .. I. Shaw.
34. Becht, C., IV. n.d. "The Long Beach Earthquake of March 10, 1933." 1-53.
35. Bechtel Civil &Minerals, Inc. n.d. "Reconnaissance Report: The
Michoacan Coast Mexico Earthquake of September 19, 1985."
36. Bechtel Power Corporation. n.d. "Bechtel Trip Report: Mexico Earthquake
of September 19, 1985." Ann Arbor, MI.
37. Bechtel Power Corporation. n.d. "Pacific Gas and Electric Company,
Humboldt Bay Power Plant- Unit No. 3."
San Francisco, CA: 1-22.
38. Berg, G. V. 1964. "The Skopje, Yugoslavia Earthquake, July 26, 1963."
New York, NY: American Iron and Steel Institute.
39. Berg, G. V. n.d. "The Adapazari, Turkey, Earthquake of July 22, 1967." A
Preliminary Report of a Field Inspection for the United States National
Academy of Engineering.
·40. Berg, G. V., B. A. Bolt, M. A. Sozen, and C. Rojahn. 1980. "Earthquake in
Romania, March 4, 1977: An Engineering Report." Washington, DC: National
Academy· Press.
41. Berg, G. V. and R. L. Husid. n.d. "Engineering Aspects of the Peru
Earthquake of May 31, 1970: A Preliminary Report to UNESCO."
42. Berg, G. V., Y. C. Das, K. V. G. K. Gokhale, and A. V. Setlur. January 13-
18, 1969. "The Koyna, India Earthquakes." Proceedings of the Fourth World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Vol. 3. Santiago, Chile: 44-57.
43. Berg, G. V. and J. L. Stratta. n.d. "Anchorage and the Alaska Earthquake
of March 27, 1964." New York, NY: American Iron and Steel Institute.
21-4
10446175
44. Berger, E. and J. Struder. September 20-25, 1982. "Geotechnical
Engineering Aspects of the Southern Italian Earthquake of November 23,
1980." Proceedings of the Seventh European Conference on Earthquake
Engineering. Athens, Greece: 91-100.
45. Bergman, E. 0. and N. L. Owen. March 1954. "Earthquake Damage Analyzed."
Petroleum Refiner 134.
46. Berz, Dr. G. and E. Hettler. November 1981. "Earthquakes in Greece,
February/March 1981." Earthquake Engineedng Research Institute Newsletter
15: 29-46.
47. Billings, H. J. 1983. Memo to C. T. Way on Trip to Coalinga to Inspect
Damage to Water and Other Lifeline Facilities.
48. Binder, R. W. 1962. "Significant Aspects of the Mexican Earthquakes May
11 and 19, 1962." Proceedings of the Structural Engineers Assodation of
Northern California.
49. Binder, R. W. June 1952. "Engineering Aspects of the 1933 Long Beach
Earthquake." Proceedings of the Symposium on Earthquake and Blast Effects
on Structures. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles: 186-
211.
50. Blume, John A. February 1963. "A Structural Dynamic Analysis of Steel
Plant Structures Subjected to the May 1960 Chilean Earthquakes." Bulletin
of the Seismological Society of America 53.
51. Bockemohle, L. W. June 25-29, 1973. "Earthquake Behavior of Commercial-
Industrial Buildings in the San Fernando Valley." Proceedings of the Fifth
World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Vol. 1. Rome, Italy: 76-81.
52. Bolt, B. A. and R. A. Uhrhammer. n.d. "Report on the March 31, 1986 Mt.
Lewis, California Earthquake (East of Fremont)." Earthquake Engineering
Research Institute Special Earthquake Report. El Cerrito, CA.
53. Bonelli, P. C. 1986. "Actividades de Investigacion."
54. Borchardt, G. and M. W. Manson. November 1986. "Magnitude 5.9 North Palm
Springs Earthquake, July 8, 1986, Riverside County." California Geology:
248-252.
55. Brandow, G. November 1979. "1979 Imperial Valley Earthquake Report."
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute Newsletter
13: 30-35.
56. Buck, R. A. and B. P. Baird. 1978. "Staff Report to the Seismic Safety
Commission on the Santa Barbara Earthquake, August 13, 1978." Sacramento,
CA.
57. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America. August 1970. 60, No. 4.
Review of Koyna Earthquake of December 11, 1967: Report of the Expert
Committee on Electrical and Mechanical Equipment. Published by UNESCO.
58. Bulman, E. R. n.d. "The Coalinga Earthquake - Monday, May 2, 1983."
10446175
21-5
59. Burdick, B. R., D. M. McCallen, and R. C. Murray. October 12, 1987.
"Summary of the October I, 1987 Earthquake Whittier, California". UCID-
21216. Livermore, CA: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
60. Burdick, R. 1986. "Summary of the September 19, 1985 Mexico Earthquake."
Livermore, CA: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory: 1-42.
61. Butler, T. A., J. G. Bennett, C. D. Babcock, and S. Natsiavas. February
1987. "Response of Seismic Category I Tanks to Earthquake Excitation."
NUREG/CR-4776. Washington, DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
62. Byerly, P. January 1956. "The Fallon-Stillwater Earthquakes of July 6,
1954 and August 23, 1954." Bu77etJ"n of the Seismological Society of
America 46: 1-14.
63. California Institute of Technology, Earthquake Engineering Research
Laboratory. March 1973. "Engineering Features of the San Fernando
Earthquake." Bulletin of the New Zealand Society for Earthquake
Engineering 6: 21-45.
64. California Institute of Technology. 1971. "Engineering Features of the
San Fernando Earthquake of February 9, 1971." Paul C. Jennings, ed. EERL
71-02. Pasadena, CA.
65. Cambra, F. J. 1982. "Earthquake Response Considerations of Broad Liquid
Storage Tanks." Berkeley, CA: Earthquake Engineering Research Center.
66. Campbell, M.D., G. R. McKay, and R. L. Williams. December 1977. "The
Tonga Earthquake of 23 June, 1977: Some Initial Observations." Bu77etin
of the New Zealand National Society of Earthquake Engineering 10: 8-12.
67. Canon, T. J., C. D. Poland, J. H. Lawder, and F. E. McClure. September
1975. "The Oroville Earthquake." Earthquake Engineering Research
Institute Newsletter 9: 1-7.
68. Capacete, J. L. and A. Herrera. July, August, and September 1972. "An
Engineering Study: The 1918 Puerto Rico Earthquake." Revista del CIAA:
41-49.
69. Carydis, P. G. and F. Gouloussi-Protonotariou. September 1982. "Seismic
Response of Electric Power Circuit Breakers." Proceedings of the Seventh
European Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Athens, Greece, 20-25:
313.
70. Carydis, P. G., N. R. Tilford, G. E. Brandow, and J. 0. Jirsa. 1982. "The
Central Greece Earthquakes of February-March 1981: A Reconnaissance and
Engineering Report." Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
71. Cassaro, M. A. and E. M. Romero. September 19-21, 1986. "The Mexico
Earthquakes - 1985: Factors Involved and Lessons Learned." Proceedings of
the International Conference. Mexico City, Mexico. New York, NY:
American Society of Civil Engineers.
72. Celebi, M. and S. Z. Uzsoy. November 1970. "Strucutral Damage at Gediz
Earthquake of March 28, 1970." Paper Presented at the Fourth Indian
Earthquake Engineering Conference. Roorkee, India: 15-24.
21-6
10446175
73. Chaffin, C. and N. Sinkeldam. July 1981. "Reconnaisance Report:
Westmorland Earthquake April 26, 1981." Earthquake Engineering Research
74. Chan, T. K. 4-13-88 San Francisco Bay Area Conference Notes. Summary of
CAL FED Response Talk.
75. Chan, T. K. 1984. "Preliminary Assessment of Damage at the San Martin
Winery from the April 24, 1984, M6.2 Earthquake." San Francisco, CA: EQE
Incorporated.
76. Chan, T. K. 1984. Telephone Conversation with lito Ballinger on
Earthquake Damage to Coalinga Filtration Plant.
77. Chan, T. K., J. D. Lichterman, S. W. Swan, and P. I. Yanev. 1983.
"Preliminary Summary Report: The Effects of the May 2, 1983, Coalinga,
California, Earthquake on Industrial Facilities." San Francisco, CA.
78. Chauhan, N. n.d. "Humboldt County Earthquake, November 8, 1980, Humboldt
Bay Units 1, 2, & 3."
79. Chen, Cuang-Qing and L. Fang. n.d. "Why the 'Elephant's Foot' Phenomenon
of Liquid Storage Tank Happened." Earthquake Behavior and Safety of Oil
and Gas Storage Facilities, Buried Pipelines, and Equipment. T. Ariman,
ed.
80. China Academy of Building Research. n.d. The Mammoth Tangshan Earthquake
of 1976: Building Damage Photo Album .. Beijing: China Academic
Publishers.
81. China Post. November 16, 1986. No. 34. Various Articles on Taiwan
Earthquake of November 15, 1986.
82. Chiu, A. N. L. and N. Nielsen. November 1984. "Damage Survey of the
Kaoiki, Hawaii Earthquake of November 16, 1983." Earthquake Spectra 1, No.
I.
83. City of Seattle. n.d. "Earthquake Survey Beginning April 30, 1965."
84. Clark, W. D. and 0. A. Glogau. September 1987. "Suspended Ceilings: The
Seismic Hazard and Damage Problem and Some Practical Solutions." Bulletin
of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering 12, No. 4.
85. Cluff, L. S. December 1985. "Firsthand Experience of the M5 8.1
Earthquake that Struck Mexico City on 19 September 1985." Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America 75: 1843-1846. Letters to the Editor.
86. Coburn, A. W., R. E. Hughes, D. F. T. Nash, and R. J. S. Spence. September
20-25, 1982. "Damage Assessment and Ground Motion in the Italian
Earthquake of 23.11.80." Proceedings of the Seventh European Conference on
87. Coffman, J. L., C. A. von Hake, and C. W. Stover, eds. 1982. "Earthquake
History of the United States." Boulder, CO: U.S. Department of Commerce
and U.S. Department of the Interior.
21-7
10446175
88. Conner, I. N. June 1985. "The San Antonio, Chile, Earthquake of 3 March
1985." Bu77etin of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake
Engineering 18.
89. Crespo, E., K. J. Nyman, and T. D. O'Rourke. July 1987. "1987 Ecuador
Earthquakes of March 5, 1987." Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
Newsletter 21, No. 7: I.
90. Dean, G. September 1979. "Advance Report of Investigation of August 6,
1979 Gilroy/Coyote Lake Earthquake." Earthquake Engineering Research
91. Dean, R. G. October 15-17, 1970. "Observations of Earthquake Damage in
Manila - 1970 Earthquake." Proceeding of the 39th Convention of the
Structural Engineers Association of California. South Lake Tahoe, CA: 25-
33.
92. Degenkolb, H. J. August 24, 1967. "Seismic Tremor Shook Caracas
Severely." Engineering News-Record: 16-18.
93. Del Valle, E. September 8-13, 1980. "Some Lessons from the March 14, 1979
Earthquake in Mexico City." Proceedings of the Seventh World Conference on
Earthquake Engineering. Vol. 4. Istanbul, Turkey: 544-553.
94. Derleth, C. Jr. September 29, 1906. "Destructive Extent of the San
Francisco Earthquake." Speech given at Hearst Hall, University of
California, Berkeley on August 9, 1906. Printed in The Engineering
Supplement to the American Builders Review 1: 1.
95. "Destructive Mexico Earthquake." April 1986. CaUfornia Geology: 78-79.
96. Dewell, H. D. and B. Willis. ri.d. "Earthquake Damage to Buildings."
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America: 282-300.
97. Dewey, J. W. March-April 1975. "The Leeward Islands Earthquakes of
October 8, 1974." Earthquake Information Bulletin 7, No. 2.
98. Dowrick, D. May 1, 1987. "Edgecumbe Earthquake of March 2, 1987." New
Zealand Engineering.
99. Dowrick, D. J. June 1985. "Preliminary Field Observations of the Chilean
Earthquake of 3 March 1985." Bu77etin of the New Zealand National Society
of Earthquake Engineering 15: 119-127.
100. Doyle, H. A. September-October 1979. "The Earthquakes Near Cadoux,
Australia, June 1979." Earthquake Information Bu77etin 11, No. 5.
101. Driskell, J. J. October 3-5, 1968. "Mexico City Earthquake of August 2nd,
1968." Proceedings 37th Annual Convention Structural Engineers Association
of California. Coronado, CA: 144-156.
102. Duke, C. M. and D. J. Leeds. April 1959. "Soil Conditions and Damage in
the Mexico Earthquake of July 28, 1957." Bu77etin of the Seismological
Society of America 49: 179-191.
21-8
10446175
103. Durham, H. W. April 23, 1931. "Managua--Its Construction and Utilities."
Engjneerjng News-Record: 696-700.
104. Earthquake Engineering Field Investigation Team. September 1986. "The
Mexican Earthquake of 19 September 1985." London: Society for Earthquakes
and Civil Engineering Dynamics.
105. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. February 1988. "Superstition
Hills Earthquakes - November 23 and 24, 1987 Imperial County, California."
Earthquake Engjneerjng Research Instjtute Newsletter 22, No. 2: 1.
106. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. October 1987 "Edgecumbe, New
Zealand, Earthquake -March 2, 1987." Earthquake Engjneerjng Research
Instjtute Newsletter 21, No. 10: 1.
107. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. September 1987 "Illinois
Earthquake of June 10, 1987." Earthquake Engjneerjng Research Instjtute
Newsletter 21, No. 9: 1.
108. Earthquake.Engineering Research Institute. August 1987. "The San Salvador
Earthquake of October 10, 1986." Earthquake Spectra 3, No. 3.
109. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. March 26, 1987. "The San
Salvador Earthquake of October 10, 1986." Draft Report.
110. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. January 1987. "Second
Earthquake in 10 Years Strikes Romania." Earthquake Engjneerjng Research
Instjtute Newsletter 21. El Cerrito, CA.
111. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. November 18, 1986. Various
Papers Presented at the San Salvador Earthquake Briefjng. Los Angeles,
California.
112. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. n.d. "Report on the September
13, 1986 Earthquake - Kalamata, Greece." Earthquake Engineering Research
Institute Special Earthquake Report. El Cerrito, CA.
113. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. August 1986. "Magnitude 5.9
Earthquake in Southern California." Earthquake Engjneerjng Research
Instjtute Newsletter 20. El Cerrito, CA.
114. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. n.d. "Report on the Chalfant
Calley, California, Earthquake- July 12, 1986." Earthquake Engineering
Research Institute Special Report. El Cerrito, CA.
115. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. n.d. "Report on the North Palm
Springs, California Earthquake - July 8, 1986." El Cerrito, CA: 1-12.
116. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. 1986. "Reducing Earthquake
Hazards: Lessons Learned from Earthquakes." El Cerrito, CA.
117. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. 1985. "Impressions of the
Guerrero-Michoacan, Mexico Earthquake of 19 September 1985: A Preliminary
Reconnaissance Report." Washington, DC: National Research Council.
21-9
10446175
118. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. n.d. "Magnitude 8.1 Earthquake
in Mexico, September 19, 1985." G. Brady, ed. Berkeley, CA: 1-3.
119. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. April 1985. "Earthquake in
Chile, March 3, 1985." Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
Newsletter 19. Special Earthquake Report. Berkeley, CA.
120. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. n.d. "Earthquake in Chile,
March 3, 1985." Special Earthquake Report. Berkeley, CA.
121. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. July 18, 1984. "Lessons
Learned from Past Earthquakes and Their Applicability to Nuclear and Other
Power and Industrial Facilities." Paper presented at Specialty Seminars on
Earthquake Engineering, Seminar No. 5, Stanford, CA.
122. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. June 1984. "Earthquake of
April 24, 1984 in Central California." Earthquake Engineering Research
Institute Newsletter. Berkeley, CA.
123. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. June 1984. "Nonstructural
Issues of Seismic Design and Construction." Publication No. 84-04.
124. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. n.d. "Fast Report on the
Magano-ken Seibu Earthquake of September 14, 1984 in Central Japan."
Special Report. Berkeley, CA.
125. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. 1984. "Coalinga, California,
Earthquake of May 2, 1983." R. E. Scholl and J. L. Stratta, ed. Berkeley,
CA.
126. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. July 1983 "Popayan, Colombia
Earthquake of March 31, 1983." Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
Newsletter 17, No. 4: 51-60.
127. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. January 1981. "Preliminary
Reconnaissance Report, El-Asnam, Algeria Earthquake." Earthquake
Engineering Research Institute Newsletter 15. Berkeley, CA.
128. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. 1980. "Reconnaissance Report:
Imperial County, California, Earthquake, October 15, 1979." G. E. Brandow,
Coordinator. Berkeley, CA.
129. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. n.d. "Reconnaissance Report:
Northern Kentucky Earthquake, July 27, 1980." Washington, DC: National
Science Foundation: 4-69.
Montenegro, Yugoslavia Earthquake, April 15, 1979."
A. Leeds, ed. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
131. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. n.d. "El-Asnam, Algeria
Earthquake, October 10, 1980." Arline Leeds, ed. Washington, DC:
National Research Council.
21-10
10446175
132. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. 1979. "Thessaloniki, Greece
Earthquake, June 20, 1978." J. A. Blume and M. H. Stauduhar, ed.
Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
Miyagi-Ken-Oki, Japan Earthquake, June 12, 1978."
P. I. Yanev, ed. Berkeley, CA.
134. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. May 1977. "Earthquake in
Romania, March 4, 1977: A Preliminary Report to EERI." Earthquake
Engjneerjng Research Instjtute Newsletter 11. Berkeley, CA.
135. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. July 1976. Earthquake
Engjneerjng Research Instjtute Newsletter 10. Various articles on July
1976 Tangshan, China Earthquake. 109-114. Berkeley, CA.
136. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. May 1975. "Preliminary Data on
March 17, 1975, Idaho Earthquake." Earthquake Engjneerjng Research
Instjtute Newsletter 9. Berkeley, CA.
137. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. November 29-30, 1973.
Conference Proceedjngs from an Earthquake Engjneerjng Research Instjtute
Conference on the Managua, Njcaragua Earthquake of December 23, 1972. San
Francisco, CA.
138. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute. 1970. Peru Earthquake Report
Committee. "Preliminary Report: Peru Earthquake of May 31, 1970."
Berkeley, CA.
139. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute Delegation to The People's
Republic of China. 1982. "Tangshan, China: A City Destroyed by
Earthquake." An Information Exchange jn Earthquake Engjneerjng and
Practjce. R. E. Scholl, ed. Berkeley, CA: 15-33.
140. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute Reconnaissance Team. 1977.
"Reconnaissance Report: Mindanao, Philippines Earthquake, August 17,
1976." Berkeley, CA: Earthquake Engineering Institute.
141. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute Reconnaissance Team. March 1976.
"The Guatemala Earthquake of February 4, 1976: A Preliminary Report."
Earthquake Engjneerjng Research Instjtute Newsletter 10: 1-20.
142. Earthquake Preparedness Task Force, Finance, Insurance, and Monetary
Services Advisory Committee. December 1982. "Scenarios for Earthquake
Related Problems at Computer Installations Used by Financial Institutions."
143. "Earthquake-shattered Peru Begins Assessing and Repairing the Damage."
June 11, 1970. Engjneerjng News-Record. Page 10.
144. Earthquake Spectra 2. February 1986. "The Chile Earthquake of March 3,
1985." Entire Issue.
145. Earthquake Spectra 2.. November 1985. "The Borah, Idaho Earthquake of
October 28, 1983." Entire Issue.
21-11
10446175
146. Earthquake Spectra 2. May 1985. "The Morgan Hill Earthquake of April 24,
1984." Entire Issue.
147. Ebel, J. E., R. L. Hill, and J. C. Pechman. May 1980. "Strong Ground
Motions for the Homestead Valley, California, Earthquake Inferred from a
Water Tank 'Seismoscope' ." California Geology: 106-109.
148. Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean. n.d. "Damage
Caused by the Earthquake in Mexico and the Repercussions on the Economy of
the Country." English Translation.
149. Eder, S. J. and S. W. Swan. n.d. "Summary of the Effects of the 1985
Mexico Earthquake to Power and Industrial Facilities." San Francisco, CA:
EQE Incorporated.
150. "Edgecumbe Earthquake of March 2, 1987, Quake Design Lessons for
Engineers." May 1, 1987 New Zealand Engineering.
151. Eguchi, R. T. July 1987. "Seismic Risk to Natural Gas and Oil Systems."
Abatement of Seismic Hazards to Lifelines: Proceedings of a Workshop on
Development of An Action Plan. Vol. 5: Papers on Gas and Liquid Fuel
Lifelines and Special Workshop Presentations. Earthquake Hazard Reduction
Series 30.
FEMA 139: 15.
152. Eidinger, J. n.d. "Notes and Observations on The Devers Substation Due to
the July 7, 1986 Palm Springs Earthquake." New York, NY: Impell
Corporation.
153. Eisenberg, A., R. Husid, and J. E. Luco. February 1972. "A Preliminary
Report: The July 8, 1971 Chilean Earthquake." Bulletin of the
Seismological Society of America 62: 423-430.
154. "Electric Utilities in Southern California Suffer Little Damage From
Quake." April 1933. Electrical West. Page 136.
155. ELECTRICORP. August 1987. "Earthquake of 2 March 1987 in the Bay of Plenty
Area: Summary of the Effects and Consequences for the Electricity
Corporation of NZ Ltd." Report No. 008 Transmission.
156. Energy, Mines and Resources Canada, Earth Physics Branch. 1983.
"Miramichi, New Brunswick, Canada Earthquake Sequence of 1982: A
Preliminary Report." A. E. Stevens, ed. El Cerrito, CA: Earthquake
Engineering Research Institute.
157. Engineering News-Record. n.d. Article on Tokyo Earthquake of 1923.
158. Engle, H. M. June 1952. "Lessons from the San Francisco Earthquake of
April 18, 1906." Proceedings of the Symposium on Earthquake and Blast
Effects on Structures." Los Angeles, CA: University of California, Los
Angeles: 180-185.
159. Engle, H. M. April 1936. "The Montana Earthquake of October, 1935:
Structural Lessons." Bulletin of Seismological Society of America 26: 99-
109.
21-12
10446175
160. EQE Engineering. April 1988. "Summary of Findings and Recommendations,
Five Buildings in Compton, California." Prepared for Investors Management
Corporation.
161. EQE Engineering. April 1988. "The Bay of Plenty, New Zealand Earthquake
of March 2, 1987, Effects on Electric Power and Industrial Facilities."
Prepared for Electric Power Research Institute. San Francisco, CA.
162. EQE Engineering. February 1988. "Investigation of the San Salvador
Earthquake of October 10, 1986, Effects on Power and Industrial
Facilities." Final Report. Prepared for Electric Power and Research
Institute. San Francisco, CA.
163. EQE Engineering. March 1991. "The Performance of Raceway Systems in
Strong Motion Earthquakes." EPRI Report No. NP-7150. Prepared for The
Seismic Qualification Utility Group. San Francisco, CA.
164. EQE Engineering. n.d. "Summary of the 1987 Bay of Plenty, New Zealand
Earthquake." San Francisco, CA.
165. EQE Incorporated. June 24, 1987. Record of Telephone Conversation
regarding Earthquake Effects on Coalinga Water Treatment Plant Backwash
Tank Between Phil Hashimoto and Richard Woon Tiong of EQE Incorporated and
lito Balling of the City of Coalinga.
166. EQE Incorporated. March 1987. "Summary of the Seismic Experience Data
Base for Raceway Systems." Prepared for the Tennessee Valley Authority.
San Francisco, CA.
167. EQE Incorporated. February 1987. "Northern Taiwan Earthquake: November
15, 1986." An EQE Brief. San Francisco, CA.
168. EQE Incorporated. January 1987. "Seismic Experience in Power and
Facilities as It Relates to Small Magnitude Earthquakes." San Francisco,
CA.
169. EQE Incorporated. 1986. "The Effects of the October 19, 1986 San Salvador
Earthquake on Power and Industrial Facilities." San Francisco, CA.
170. EQE Incorporated. 1986. "Summary of the October 19, 1986 San Salvador
171. EQE Incorporated. 1986. "Summary of the July 21, 1986 Chalfant Valley,
California Earthquake." San Francisco, CA.
172. EQE Incorporated. 1986. "Summary of the July 8, 1986 North Palm Springs,
California Earthquake." San Francisco, CA.
173. EQE Incorporated. 1986. "Summary of the May 7, 1986 Adak, Alaska
174. EQE Incorporated. 1986. "Summary of the May 2, 1983 Coalinga, California
175. EQE Incorporated. 1986. "Effects of the March 3, 1985 Chile Earthquake on
Power and Industrial Facilities." San Francisco, CA.
21-13
10446175
176. EQE Incorporated. May 1986. "Application of Seismic Experience Data to
Browns Ferry Conduit and Cable Trays." Vol,. 1: Summary Document. Draft.
Prepared for the Tennessee Valley Authority. San Francisco, CA.
177. EQE Incorporated. 1986. "Compilation of Earthquake Data on Equipment
Anchorages." San Francisco, CA.
178. EQE Incorporated. 1986. "The Effects of the North Palm Springs Earthquake
on Power Facilities in the Epicentral Area." San Francisco, CA.
179. EQE Incorporated. 1986. "Review of Seismic Design Criteria for American I
Cogeneration Project." Appendix B. San Francisco, CA.
180. EQE Incorporated. 1986. "Power and Industrial Facilities in the
Epicentral Area of the 1985 Mexico Earthquake." San Francisco, CA: 1-29.
181. EQE Incorporated. 1985. "The Effects of the September 19, 1985 Mexico
Earthquake on Industrial Facilities in the Epicentral Area." San
Francisco, CA.
182. EQE Incorporated. 1985. "Summary of the September 19, 1985 Mexico
183. EQE Incorporated. November 1985. "Practical Equipment Seismic Upgrade and
Strengthening Guidelines." Draft. Prepared for the Lawrence Livermore
National Laboratory. San Francisco, CA.
184. EQE Incorporated. July 1985. "The Application of Seismic Experience Data
to Architectural Fixtures at the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station."
San Francisco, CA.
185. EQE Incorporated. June 1985. "A Review of the Performance of Suspended
Ceilings in Earthquakes and its Application to the Control Room Ceiling of
the Comanche Peak Electric Station." Prepared for Texas Utilities
Generating Company. San Francisco, CA.
186. EQE Incorporated. 1985. "Study of the Seismic Performance of C02 Storage
Tanks at Heysham 2." San Francisco, CA.
187. EQE Incorporated. 1984. "The Effects of the April 24, 1984 Morgan Hill
Earthquake on Industrial Facilities." San Francisco, CA.
188. EQE Incorporated. 1984. "The Performance of Industrial Facilities and
Their Equipment in the Coalinga, California, Earthquake of May 2, 1983."
San Francisco, CA.
189. EQE Incorporated. 1984. "Se 1ected Pleasant Va 11 ey Pumping Plant Data and
the Effects of the May 2, 1983, Coalinga, California, Earthquake on the
Plant." San Francisco, CA: 1-40.
190. EQE Incorporated. 1984. "Investigation of Equipment Performance in
Foreign Earthquakes and the 1964 Alaska Earthquake." San Francisco, CA.
191. EQE Incorporated. 1982. "On the Performance of Large Gantry and Bridge
Cranes in Past Earthquakes." San Francisco, CA: 9-10.
21-14
10446175
192. EQE Incorporated. n.d. "The Performance of Turbines During Past
Earthquakes." San Francisco, CA.
193. EQE Incorporated. n.d. "Burbank Power Plant." San Francisco, CA.
194. EQE Incorporated. n.d. "Pasadena Power Plant." San Francisco, CA.
195. EQE Incorporated. n.d. "Valley Steam Plant." San Francisco, CA.
196. Erdik, M. November 1984. "Report on the Turkish Earthquake of October 30,
1983." Earthquake Spectra 1, No. 1.
197. Ertle, M. and R. Bock. 1983. "Report on the Coalinga Earthquake."
Torrance. CA: Little Company of Mary Hospital.
198. Espinosa, A. F. and S. T. Algermissen. n.d. "A Study of Soil
Amplification Factors in Earthquake Damage Areas, Caracas, Venezuela."
Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration.
199. Fairweather, V. January 1986. "Rebuilding Mexico City." Civil
Engineering: 36-37.
200. Ferver, G. W. February 22, 1973. Letter to Mr. Peter I. Yanev and Mr.
Roland Marsh.
201. Finance, Insurance, and Monetary Services Committee. June 1987. "Data
Processing Facilities: Guidelines for Earthquake Hazard Mitigation."
Sacramento, CA: VSP Associates.
202. Finch, M. 0. April 1988. "Damage to Irrigation Facilities in Imperial
Valley, Superstition Hills Earthquakes of November 1987, Imperial County,
California." California Geology: 85.
203. Fintel, M. n.d. "Performance of Precast and Prestressed Concrete in
Mexico Earthquake." Chicago: Prestressed Concrete Institute.
204. Flores, R., S. Arias, V. Jenschke, and I. A. Rosenberg. July 11-18, 1960.
"Engineering Aspects of the Earthquakes in the Maipo Valley, Chile, in
1958." Proceedings of the Second World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering. Vol. 1. Tokyo and Kyoto, Japan.
205. Flores, R. A. n.d. "Engineering Aspects of Chilean Earthquakes of May 21
and 22, 1960."
206. Forell, N. January 1979. "Quick-look Report on Oaxaca, Mexico
Earthquake." Earthquake Engineering Research Institute Newsletter 13: 6-
10.
207. Forell, N. and J. P. Nicoletti. n.d. "Mexico Earthquakes: Oaxaca-
November 29, 1978; Guerrero- March 14, 1979." Berkeley, CA: Earthquake
208. Freeman, J. R. 1932. Earthquake Damage and Earthquake Insurance: Studies
of a Rational Basis for Earthquake Insurance. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
21-15
10446175
209. Gekhman, A. S. and V. V. Spiridonov. n.d. "Evaluation of Seismic
Stability of Gas Field."
210. General Headquarters, Far East Command. June 1948. Office of the
Engineer. "The Fukui Earthquake, Hokuriku Region, Japan." Vol. 2:
Engineering.
211. Glick, D., D. McCormick, N. Horstman, N. Bass, and G. Ung. n.d. "Adak,
Alaska Earthquake- May 7, 1986." Earthquake Engineering Research
Institute Special Earthquake Report. El Cerrito, CA.
212. Gonzalez, A. I. January 12, 1973. Transmittal on Equipment Damaged at
ENALUF Thermal Plant.
213. Guan, Q. December 1987. "1976 Tangshan, China Earthquake." California
Geology: 282
214. Guan-Qing, C. April 1, 1980. "Seismic Behaviour of the
Qinhuangdao/Beijing Oil Pipeline in the Tangshan Earthquake." New York,
NY: American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
215. Gupta, S. P. September 20-25, 1982. "A Survey of Damages Due to
Earthquake of July 29 in Western Nepal-India Border Region." Proceedings
of the Seventh European Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Vol. 1.
Athens, Greece: 109-117.
216. GUlkan, P., A. GUrpinar, M. Celebi, E. Arpat, and S. Gencoglu. n.d.
"Engineering Report on the Muradiye-~aldiran, Turkey, Earthquake of 24
November 1976." Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
217. H. J. Degenkolb Associates, Engineers. n.d. "The Superstition Hills
Earthquakes, November 23 and 24, 1987." San Francisco, CA.
218. H. J. Degenkolb Associates, Engineers. n.d. "The Whittier Earthquake,
October 1, 1987." San Francisco, CA.
219. H. J. Degenkolb Associates, Engineers. 1983. "Report Observations,
Earthquake of May 2, 1983, Coalinga, California." San Francisco, CA.
220. Haas, J. E. and R. S. Ayre. 1969. "The Western Sicily Earthquake of
1968." Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
221. Hadjian, A. H. 1986. "Reconnaissance Notes: SCE Devers Substation, Palm
Springs Earthquake, July 8, 1986."
222. Hadley, H. M. n.d. "How Structures Withstood the Japanese Earthquake and
Fire." Detroit, MI: American Concrete Institute. Reprinted for Portland
Cement Association.
223. Haghipour, A., S. M. Farooqui, M. Amidi, and A. Aghanabati. n.d. "The
Tabas Earthquake of 16 September 1978, East Iran - A Field Report."
224. Hamburger, R. 0., D. l. McCormick, and S. Hom. n.d. "Performance of Tilt-
Up Buildings in the October 1, 1987 Whittier Earthquake." San Francisco,
CA: EQE Engineering.
21-16
10446175
225. Hamilton, R. M., G. J. Lensen, R. I. Skinner, 0. J. Hall,
A. L. Andrews, C. M. Strachan, and 0. M. Glogau. 1969. "Gisborne
Earthquake, New Zealand, March 1966." Bulletin 194. New Zealand
Department of Scientific and Industrial Research.
226. Hara, F. September 22-25, 1975. "A New Method of Earthquake Damage
Analysis for Industrial Facilities and Its Application to the Cases of
Recent Earthquakes in Japan." Proceedings of the Fifth European Conference
on Earthquake Engineering. Vol. 2. Istanbul, Turkey.
227. Hardy, G. S. and M. J. Griffin. August 1987. "Relay Performance in
Earthquakes." Experience with Structures and Components in Operating
Reactors. Folker H. Wittmann, ed. 17-21 Vol. D of Structural Mechanics in
Reactor Technology. Transactions of the 9th International Conference on
Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Rotterdam/Boston: A. A. Balkema.
228. Haroun, M. A. April 1983. "Behavior of Unanchored Oil Storage Tanks:
Imperial Valley Earthquake." J. of Technical Topics in Civil Engineering
109: 23-41.
229. Haroun, M. A. and G. W. Hausner. May 11-15, 1981. "Seismic Damage of
Unanchored Oil Storage Tanks." New York, NY: American Society of Civil
Engineers
230. Haroun, M. A. and G. W. Hausner. May 11-15, 1981. "Seismic Damage of
Unanchored Oil Storage Tanks." ASCE Convention, New York, NY. Preprint.
231. Harris, S., M. Jones, M. Prock, S. Schneider, and G. Zaharoff. October
1986. "Review and Evaluation of Spatial System Interaction Programs."
NUREG/CR-4306. Oakridge, TN: Oakridge National Laboratory.
232. Hart, G. n.d. "Field Notes from El Centro Earthquake, 15 October 1979."
233. Havskov, J., S. K. Singh, E. Nava, T. Dominguez, and M. Rodriguez. April
1983. "Playa Azul, Michoacan, Mexico, Earthquake of 25 October 1981 (Ms =
7.3)." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 73: 449-457.
234. Herring, K. S., V. Rooney, and N. C. Chokshi. 1981. "Reconnaissance
Report: Effects of November 8, 1980 Earthquake on Humboldt Bay Power Plant
and Eureka, California Area." Washington, DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
235. Hintergr~ber, Dr. M. September 8-13, 1980. "Earthquake in the Schw~bische
Alb/Germany, September 3, 1978." Proceedings of the Seventh World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Instanbul, Turkey: 438-445.
236. Hodder, S. B. June 1984. "Strong Motion Record from Turangi, 5 March,
1984." Bulletin of the New Zealand National Society of Earthquake
Engineering 17, No. 2.
237. Horstman, N. G., P. I. Yanev, and D. L. McCormick. n.d. "Overview of
Power Plant and Industrial Facility Performance in Earthquakes in 1985
through 1987." San Francisco, CA: EQE Engineering.
21-17
10446175
238. Hausner, G. W. June 1952. "The Tehachapi Earthquake of July 21, 1952."
Proceedings of the Symposium on Earthquake and Blast Effects on Structures.
Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles: 226-233.
239. Huixian, L. and Z. Zaiyong. September 8-13, 1980. "Lessons Learned from
the Tangshan Earthquake." Proceedings of the Seventh World Conference on
Earthquake Engineering. Istanbul, Turkey: 452-461.
240. Husid, R., A. F. Espinosa, and J. De Las Casas. October 1977. "The Lima
Earthquake of October 3, 1974: Damage Distribution." Bulletin of the
241. Husid, R. and C. Medone. n.d. "Spectral Analysis of the July 8, 1971
Earthquake in Central Chile."
242. Imperial County Fire Department. n.d. "November 24, 1987 Earthquake."
News Release.
243. Indian J. of Power and River Valley Development. 1971. P. K. Menon, ed.
Special Number, 1971: Proceedings of the Symposium on Koyna Earthquake and
Related Problems. Calcutta.
244. International Masonry Institute. 1985. "Mexico Earthquake September,
1985." Washington, DC.
245. "Investigation Report on Damage Due to the Off-shore Earthquake in Miyagi
Prefecture in 1978 (Preliminary Report)." 1978. Seisan Kenkyu 30.
Austin, TX: Ralph McElroy Co., Inc., 12-65.
246. Irvine, H. M. March 1974. "The Veracruz Earthquake of 28 August 1973."
Bulletin of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering 7.
247. Irvine, H. M. 1973. "The Veracruz Earthquake of 28 August 1973."
Pasadena, CA: California Institute of Technology.
248. Iwasaki, T., Y. Sasaki, Y. Wakizaka, N. Matsumoto, K. Senoo, T. Arakawa, K.
Kawashima, and N. Obinata. June 1984. "Report on Damages to Civil
Engineering Structures Due to the Nihonkai-Chubu Earthquakes of 1983."
Some Recent Earthquake Engineering Research and Practice in Japan. Tokyo:
Japanese National Committee of the International Association for Earthquake
Engineering.
249. Iwasaki, T. and K. Kawashima. June 1979. "Damage to Civil Engineering
Structures Due to the Near Izu-Ohshima Earthquake of January 14, 1978."
Bulletin of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake Engineering 12:
127-135.
250. Japan National Committee on Earthquake Engineering. January 22-February 1,
1965. "Niigata Earthquake of 1964." Proceedings of the Third World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vol. III. Aukland and Wellington,
New Zealand.
251. Jephcott, D. K. and D. E. Hudson. 1974. "The Performance of Public School
Plants During the San Fernando Earthquake." Pasadena, CA: California
Institute of Technology.
21-18
10446175
252. Jirsa, J. 0. and G. E. Brandow. May 1981. "The Greek Earthquakes of
February 24 and 25, 1981: A Brief Reconnaissance Report." Earthquake
Engineering Research Institute Newsletter 15: 67-72.
253. John A. Blume & Associates, Engineers. 1971. "Damage Survey, San Fernando
Earthquake of February 9, 1971." Prepared for U.S. Atomic Energy
Commission. Division of Reactor Standards. San Francisco, CA.
254. John A. Blume &Associates, Engineers, Research Division. 1970.
"Structural Effects of the Fairbanks, Alaska Earthquake of June 21, 1967."
San Francisco, CA: 7-8.
255. John A. Blume & Associates, Engineers, Research Division. 1968. "1967
Columbian Earthquakes." San Francisco, CA.
256. John A. Blume & Associates, Engineers, Research Division. 1968.
"Structural Effects of the Truckee, California Earthquake of September 12,
1966." San Francisco, CA: 1-8.
257. John A. Blume & Associates, Engineers, Research Division. 1967.
"Structural Response Observations, Parkfield, California Earthquake - June
27, 1966." San Francisco, CA: 9-13.
258. John A. Blume & Associates, Engineers, Research Division. March 1966.
"Report on Structural Damage in Lumberton and Dulce, New Mexico Caused by
the Earthquake of January 22, 1966." Prepared for the U.S. Atomic Energy
Commission. Nevada Operations Office. Operational Safety Division.
Structural Response Program. San Francisco, CA.
259. John A. Blume &Associates, Engineers, Research Division. 1966. "Report
on Structural Damage in Anchorage, Alaska Caused by the Earthquake of March
27, 1964." Washington, DC: U.S. Atomic Energy Commission.
260. Johnson, E. K. and T. R. Winch. n.d. "Trip Report: UCSB Earthquake
Damage Survey."
261. Johnson, G. S., P. I. Yanev, and S. J. Eder. 1987. "Qualification of
Nuclear Plant Raceway Systems Based on Earthquake Experience Data." San
Francisco, CA: EQE Incorporated.
262. Jungmann, A., S. Freystatter, and W. Hollerbach. September 20-25, 1982.
"Earthquake Effects on Mechanical Equipment - Corinth Earthquakes
Febr./March, 1981." Proceedings of the Seventh European Conference on
263. Kassawara, Dr. R. P., D. L. McCormick, and S. W. Swan. February 4, 1988.
"Performance of Selected Industrial Facilities in Recent Earthquakes in
Chile, Mexico, and El Salvador."
264. Katayama, T. May 8-10, 1979. "Damage to Lifeline Systems in the City of
Sendai Caused by the 1978 Miyagiken-Oki Earthquake." Proceedings of the
Second South Pacific Regional Conference on Earthquake Engineering.
Wellington, New Zealand: 588-604.
21-19
10446175
265. Kawashima, K., N. Obinata, and T. Haranda. July 29-August 1, 1984.
"Effects of the- Nihonkai-Chubu Earthquake of May 1983 on Lifeline
Facilities." Proceedings of the U.S.-Japan Workshop on Urban Earthquake
Hazards Reduction. Stanford, CA.
266. Kawasumi, H., ed. n.d. "General Report on the Niigata Earthquake of
1964." Tokyo: Tokyo Electrical Engineering College Press.
267. Kircher, C. A. and I. Chang. March 31- April 2, 1986. "Evaluation of
Building Response Recorded During the Morgan Hill Earthquake." Proceedings
of the Third Conference on Dynamic Response of Strucures. Los Angeles, CA.
Reprint.
268. Kiremidjian, A., K. Ortiz, R. Nielsen, and B. Safavi. n.d. "Seismic Risk
to Major Industrial Facilities." Report No. 72. Stanford, CA: Stanford
University.
269. Klopfenstein, A. and B. V. Palk. n.d. "Effects of the Managua Earthquake
on the Electrical Power System."
270. Kraftwerk Union. n.d. "The German Earthquake of September 3rd, 1978 -
Albstadt."
271. Krishna, J. September 1980. "Case Study of Koyna Dam." Bu77etin of the
Indian Society of Earthquake Technology 17, No. 3: 1-16.
272. Lagorio, H. J. and G. G. Mader. 1981. "Earthquake in Campania-Basilicata,
Italy, November 23, 1980: Architectural and Planning Aspects." El
Cerrito, CA: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute.
273. Lara, M. A. January 1983. "El Salvador Earthquake, June 19, 1982."
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute Newsletter 17: 87-96.
274. Lastrico, R. M. and J. Monge. June 25-29, 1973. "Engineering Aspects of
the July 8, 1971 Earthquake in Central Chile." Proceedings of the Fifth
World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Rome, Italy: 468-475.
275. Laverty, G. L. 1983. Memo to A. B. Bonner on Earthquake-related Damage to
Coalinga and Surrounding Towns.
276. Ledbetter, S. R.. and J. J. Bommer. September 1987. "The San Salvador
Earthquake of 10 October 1986." A Field Report by EEFIT.
277. Lee, T. C. May 1980. "1976 Tangshan Earthquake Damage in Beijing."
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute Newsletter 14: 61.
278. Levin, H. A. and J. A. Martore. n.d. "Reconnaissance Report - Imperial
Valley Earthquake- October 15, 1979."
279. Lew, H. S., E. V. Leyendecker, and R. D. Dikkers. 1971. "Engineering
Aspects of the San Fernando Earthquake." Washington, DC: U.S. Department
of Commerce.
280. Lew, H. S., R. D. Dikkers, E. V. Leyendecker, E. 0. Pfrang, and
S. Kramer. 1971. "The San Fernando, California Earthquake of February 9,
1971." Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
21-20
10446175
281. Logan, M. H. 1967. "Effect of the Earthquake of March 27, 1964, on the
Eklutna Hydroelectric Project, Anchorage, Alaska." Geological Survey
Professional Paper 545-A. Washington, DC: United States Government
Printing Office: A1-A23.
282. Lomnitz, C. and H. Castaiios. December 1985. "A Same-day Overflight in the
Epicentral Area of the Great Mexico Earthquake of 19 September 1985."
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 75: 1837-1841. Letters
to the Editor.
283. Lund, Le Val. July 1987. "Water Storage Facilities." Abatement of
Seismic Hazards to Lifelines: Proceedings of a Workshop on Development of
An Action Plan. Vol 1: Papers on Water and Sewer Lifelines and Special
Workshop Presentations. Earthquake Hazard Reduction Series 26. FEMA 135:
39.
284. "Managua." n.d. A study of the 1972 Earthquake.
285. Manos, G. C. August 1986. "Earthquake Tank-Wall Stability of Unanchored
Tanks." Journal of Structural Engineering 112, No. 8.
286. Manos, G. C. and R. W. Clough. October 4-5 1984. "Dynamic Response
Correlation of Cylindrical Tanks." Lifeline Earthquake Engineering:
Performance, Design, and Construction. Proceedings of a Symposium by the
Technical Council on Lifeline Earthquake Engineering of ASCE. San
Francisco, CA.
287. Manos, G. C. and R. W. Clough. n.d. "Tank Damage During the May 1983
Coalinga Earthquake." Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics.
Vol. 13. New York, NY: Wiley: 449-466.
288. "The March 2, 1987 Earthquake Near Edgecumbe, North Island, New Zealand."
November 3, 1987. EOS 68, No. 44: 1162.
289. Marsh, R. 0. and P. I. Yanev. 1973. "Managua, Nicaragua Earthquake,
December 23, 1972, Summary Report." San Francisco, CA: Bechtel Power
Corporation.
290. Matthiesen, R. B. October 1980. "Summary of Seminar on El Centro Quake."
Structural Moments 6. Magazine of the Structural Engineers Association of
Northern California.
291. Mautz, F. F. n.d. "Alaskan Earthquake Summary of Observations April 22
Thru 27, 1964, and Conclusions."
292. McClure, F. E. May 1973. "Performance of Single Family Dwellings in the
San Fernando Earthquake of February 9, 1971." U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development and U.S. Department of Commerce. Prepared for the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and supported by the
Department of Housing and Urban Development under Interagency Agreement
IAA-H-32-71.
293. McCormick, D. L. December 9, 1987. "Summary of Post Earthquake Inspection
of Mesquite Lake Resource Recovery Facility, EQE Project Number 30051.01."
Letter to Mr. Noel D. Hurley.
21-21
10446175
294. McCormick, D. L. and S. W. Swan. December 1, 1987. "Site Inspection,
Mesquite Lake Refuse to Energy Power Plant Earthquake Survey - November 24,
1987 EQ." Memo.
295. McCormick, D. L. and P. I. Yanev. n.d. "Earthquake Experience Data on
Industrial and Power Structures and Equipment: Applications to Seismic
Criteria, Design, and Evaluation." San Francisco, CA: EQE Engineering.
296. Meehan, J. F. September 1975. "Oroville Earthquakes of August 1, 1975."
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute Newsletter
9: 11-24.
297. Meehan, J. F. December 1974. "Reconnaissance Report of the Veracruz,
Mexico Earthquake of August 28, 1973." Bulletin of the Seismological
298. Meehan, J. F., D. Leeds, R. A. lmbsen, R. D. McJunkin, C. D. Turpen, and S.
Panos. n.d. "Trinidad-Offshore, California Earthquake, November 8, 1980."
Berkeley, CA: Earthquake Engineering Research Institute: 74-81.
299. Meehan, J. F., H. J. Degenkolb, D. F. Moran, K. V. Steinbrugge,
L. S. Cluff, G. A. Carver, R. B. Matthiesen, and C. F. Knudson. 1973.
"Managua, Nicaragua Earthquake of December 23, 1972." Earthquake
Engineering Research Institute Reconnaissance Report. Berkeley, CA.
300. Memorandum on SCE Strong Motion Instrument Data - Generating Station
Locations, February 21, 1973 Point Mugu Earthquake. March 21, 1973.
301. Merino y Coronado, Dr. J. 1957. "The Earthquake of July 28; 1957."
Anales del Instituto de Geofisics 3: 89-125.
302. Miedema, H. J. and J. B. Olsen. April 1973. "Repair of Seismic Damage to
Aboveground Pipelines." ASCE National Structural Engineering Meeting: 9-
13. San Francisco, CA. Preprint.
303. Miller, A. L. June 1952. "Earthquake Lessons From the Pacific Northwest."
Proceedings of the Symposium on Earthquake and Blast Effects on
Structures." C. Martin Duke and Morris Feigen, eds. Los Angeles, CA:
University of California, Los Angeles: 212-223.
304. Miller, R. K. September-October 1979. "The Santa Barbara Earthquake of 13 ·
August, 1978." J. International Association for Earthquake Engineering 7:
491-506.
305. Miller, R. K. and S. F. Felszeghy. 1978. "Engineering Features of the
Santa Barba~a Earthquake of August 13, 1978." El Cerrito, CA: Earthquake
306. Ministry of Construction, Public Works Research Institute. Earthquake
Disaster Prevention Department, Earthquake Engineering Division. 1979.
"Functional Damage and Rehabilitation of Lifelines in the Miyagikeri-Oki
Earthquake of 1978. Revised.
21-22
10446175
307. Ministry of Energy. Electricity Division. March 1987. "Earthquake of 2
March 1987 in the Bay of Plenty Area: Preliminary Report of Interruption
of Service, Damage to Plant and Operational Restoration of Edgecumbe,
Kawerau and Matahina." Report No. 068/TM.
308. Mitchel, D. et al. 1986. "Lessons from the 1985 Mexican Earthquake."
Canadjan Journal of Cjvjl Engjneerjng 13,
No. 5: 535-557.
309. Mitchell, Captain W. A. 1976. "The Lice Earthquake in Southeastern
Turkey: A Geography of the Disaster." Colorado Springs, CO: United
States Air Force Academy.
310. Monroe, N. J. and J. D. Stevenson. n.d. "Preliminary Report on the Ohio
Earthquake of January 31, 1986." Earthquake Engjneerjng Research Instjtute
Newsletter. El Cerrito, CA.
311. Monterroso V. and M. Roberto. 1976. "The Guatemala Earthquake of
February, 1976." Proceedjngs of the 1976 Conventjon of the Structural
Engjneers Assocjatjon of Caljfornja. Yosemite National Park, CA: 67-75.
312. Moore, A. T. n.d. "The Response of Cylindrical Liquid Storage Tanks to
Earthquakes." San Francisco, CA: URS/John A. Blume & Associates.
313. Moran, D. September 1975. "Engineering Aspects of the Oroville-Palermo,
California Earthquake of August 1, 1975: Reconnaissance Report."
Earthquake Engjneerjng Research Institute Newsletter
9: 25-29.
314. Moran, D. F. n.d. "Report on Earthquake Damage and Repairs to Sylmar
Converter Station and Switchyard, San Fernando Earthquake of February 9,
1971." Los Angeles, CA: Los Angeles Department of Water and Power: 1-7.
315. Morelos, J. Ma. and Ing. C. R. Ulloa. n.d. "Effects of the September 1985
Earthquakes on Dams Built on the Balsas River." Mexico, D. F., Mexico:
Centro Editorial de la Direcci6n General. Comisi6n Federal de
Electricidad.
316. Moriya, K. 1985. "Summary of the September 19, 20, 1985 Mexico
Earthquakes." 12-63.
317. MPR Associates, Inc. 1986. Report on Meeting of ACRS Subcommittee on
Extreme External Phenomena, The Earthquake at Perry Nuclear Generating
Station." Washington, DC.
318. Murphy, L. M. 1973. "San Fernando, California, Earthquake of February 9,
1971." 3 vols. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
319. Murray, R. C., T. A. Nelson, D. W. Coats, D. S. Ng, and H. J. Weaver. n.d.
"Impact of the January-February 1980 Earthquake Sequence on Various
Structures at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory." Livermore, CA:
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory: 1-6.
320. Musulin, M. B., G. S. Hardy, P. D. Smith, and P. I. Yanev. n.d. "Power
Piping During and After Earthquakes." Vol. 2.
San Francisco, CA: EQE Incorporated.
21-23
10446175
321. Narita, K. November 8-12, 1976. "Study on Pipeline Failure Due to
Earthquake." Proceedings of the U.S.-Japan Seminar on Earthquake
Engineering Research with Emphasis on Lifeline Systems. Tokyo: Gakujutsu
Sunken Fukyu-kai.
322. Nason, R. n.d. "Damage in Santa Clara and Santa Cruz Counties, California
Caused by the Earthquake of 18 April 1906." Report 80-1076. Washington,
DC: U.S. Geological Survey.
323. National Board of Fire Underwriters. 1964. "The Alaska Earthquake, March
27, 1964." San Francisco, CA: Pacific Fire Rating Bureau.
324. National Board of Fire Underwriters, Committee on Fire Prevention and
Engineering Standards. n.d. "Report on the Southern California Earthquake
of March 10, 1933." New York, NY.
325. National Research Council, Committee on the Alaska Earthquake of the
Division of Earth Sciences. 1973. "The Great Alaska Earthquake of 1964:
Engineering." Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
326. Nelson, T. A. 1980. "Response of El Centro Steam Plant Equipment During
the October 15, 1979 Imperial Valley Earthquake." Washington, DC: U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
327. New Zealand Reconnaissance Team. December 1985. "The September 1985
Mexico Earthquake Preliminary Report." Bu77etin of the New Zealand
National Society for Earthquake Engineering 18: 291-312.
328. Nicoletti, J. P. and N. F. Forell. October 4-6, 1979. "Reconnaissance
Observations on Two Recent Mexican Earthquakes." Proceedings of the 48th
Annual Convention of the Structural Engineers Association of California.
Coronado, California:
154-169.
329. Nicoletti, J., N. Forell, and A. Dawson. July 1979. "Preliminary Report
of the EERI Reconnaissance Team, Guerrero Earthquake - March 14, 1979."
330. Nielsen, N. N., A. S. Furumoto, W. Lum, and B. J. Morrill. 1977. "The
Honomu, Hawaii Earthquake: Report of Inspection." Washington, DC:
National Academy of Sciences.
331. Nielsen, N. N. and K. Nakagawa. 1968. "The Tokachi-Oki Earthquake, Japan,
May 16, 1968: A Preliminary Report on Damage to Structures." Tokyo:
International Institute of Seismology and Earthquake Engineering.
332. Niwa, A. and R. W. Clough. n.d. "Buckling of Cylindrical Liquid-Storage
Tanks Under Earthquake Loading."
333. Novoa M. June 25-29, 1973. "Earthquake Analysis and Specification of the
High Voltage Electrical Equipment." Proceedings of the Fifth World
Conference on Earthqu·ake Engineering. Vol. 1. Rome, Italy: 624-629.
21-24
10446175
334. Okamoto, S. and C. Tamura. December 1970. "Field Survey On Damages in the
Epicentral Area of the Earthquake (M=6.2}." Bulletin of Earthquake
Resistant Structure Research Center
4: 1-12.
335. Okubo, T. and M. Ohashi. August 22-24, 1979. "Miyagi-Ken-Oki, Japan
Earthquake of June 12, 1978: General Aspects and Damage." U.S. National
Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Stanford, CA: 1-15.
336. Olsen, P. G. October 30 to November 3, 1972. "Seismic Micronization in
the City of Santa Barbara, California." Proceedings of the International
Conference on Micronization for Safer Construction Research and
Application. Seattle, WA: 395-408.
337. Olsen, P. G and A. G. Sylvester. June 1975. "The Santa Barbara Earthquake
29 June 1925." California Geology: 123-134.
338. P. W. Cable Trays. n.d. Paper on San Fernando Earthquake of February 9,
1971.
339. Pacific Gas and Electric Company. 1975. "Report on June 7, 1975 Ferndale
340. Pacific Gas and Electric Company. 1952. "Bakersfield, California
Earthquakes, July and August 1952."
341. Pacific Gas and Electric Company. 1952. Memorandum on Damage Due to
Earthquakes in the Arvin and Tehachapi Areas and Vicinity.
342. Pacific Gas and Electric Company. 1952. Minutes of Meeting to Discuss
Earthquake Damage. San Francisco, CA.
343. Pacific Gas and Electric Company. 1952. Resume of Damage to PGandE System
in the Earthquakes of July 21 and August 22, 1952.
344. Palk, B. V. and S. M. Nekota. October 1971. "San Fernando Earthquake of
February 9, 1971: Effects on Power System Operation and Electrical
Equipment." Los Angeles, CA: Power System Design and Construction
Division, Department of Water and Power of the City of Los Angeles.
345. Palm Springs Earthquake Task Force. December 1986. "Lessons Learned From
the July 8, 1986 Palm Springs Earthquake." Rosemead, CA: Southern
California Edison.
346. Papastamatiou, D. J. n.d. "The 1978 Chalkidhiki Earthquakes in N. Greece
-A Preliminary Field Report and Discussion." London, England: Dames &
Moore Advanced Technology Group.
347. Papers on the 1976 Tangshan, China Earthquake. August 22-24, 1979.
Presented at the Second U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering.
Stanford, CA.
348. Papers on the February 9, 1971 San Fernando Earthquake.
October 7-9, 1971. Presented at the 40th Annual Convention of the
Structural Engineers Association of California. Coronado, CA: 82-109.
10446175
21-25
349. Pardee, J. T. 1926. "The Montana Earthquake of June 27, 1925." Shorter
Contributions to General Geology." W. C. Mendenhall, ed. Washington, DC:
Government Printing Office: 7-9.
350. Patterson, A. W. and R. L. Williams. June 1980. "The Taveuni Earthquake
Fiji on 17 November 1979." Bulletin of the New Zealand National Society
for Earthquake Engineering 13.
351. Pender, M. J. and T. W. Robertson. September 1987. "Edgecumbe Earthquake:
Reconnaissance Report." Bu77etin of the New Zealand National Society for
Earthquake Engineering 20, No. 3: 201.
352. Penn, D. R., E. Romero, and R. A. Tognazzini. 1986. "Earthquake Damage
Assessment to Southern California Edison's Devers Bulk Power Station."
353. "Peruvian Quake Damages Engineered Structures." December 17, 1970.
Engineering News-Record. Page 14.
354. "PGandE Rides Out 'Quake." April 1, 1957. Electrical World. Page 48.
355. Pitilakis, K. D., S. Tsotsos, and T. Hatzigogos. September 20-25, 1982.
"Damages to Plataees and Erythres Due to the February-March 1981 Alkyonides
Gulf (Greece) Earthquakes." Proceedings of the Seventh European Conference
on Earthquake Engineering. Athens, Greece: 53-62.
356. Poland, C. D. and R. J. Moreno, Jr. n.d. "A Critique of the Lateral Force
Requirements for Thirteen Undamaged Coalinga Structures in Light of the
Recently Recorded Design Level Earthquake." San Francisco, CA: H. J.
Degenkolb Associates, Engineers.
357. Portland Cement Association. n.d. "Preliminary Report: The Behavior of
Reinforced Concrete Structures in the Caracas, Venezuela Earthquake of July
29, 1967." San Francisco and Los Angeles, CA.
358. Powell, S. J. November 1980. "Holding Down Bolts for Chimneys in
Earthquakes." Report No. 235. Private Bay, Auckland, New Zealand:
University of Auckland. Department of Civil Engineering.
359. Priestley, M. J. N., J. H. Wood, and B. J. Davidson. December 1986.
"Seismic Design of Storage Tanks." Bu77etin of the New Zealand National
Society for Earthquake Engineering 19,
No. 4: 272.
360. PRisis, S. A. and EQE Engineering. April 1988. "Strong Motion in the
February 6, 1987 Cerro Prieto Earthquake." Prepared for the Electric Power
Research Institute.
361. Proceedings of the Eighth European Conference on Earthquake Engineering.
1986. Vol. II. Lisbon, Portugal.
362. Proceedings of the Third U.S. National Conference on Earthquake
Engineering. August 24-28, 1986. El Cerrito, CA: Earthquake Engineering
Research Institute.
363. "Quake Shatters Balkan Village." November 6, 1969. Engineering News-
Record. Page 31.
21-26
10446175
364. Razani, R. and K. L. Lee. 1973. "The Engineering Aspects of the Qir
Earthquake of 10 April 1972 in Southern Iran." Washington, DC: National
Academy of Sciences.
365. Real, C. R., R. D. McJunkin, and E. Leivas. December 1979. "Effects of
Imperial Valley Earthquake- 15 October 1979, Imperial Valley, California."
California Geology.
366. Reichle, M. S. April 1986. "Mexico Earthquake Damage: Lifeline
Performance." California Geology: 75-77.
367. Reitherman, R. K. November 1979. "Some Notes on Non-Structural Features
of the August 6, 1979 Coyote Lake Earthquake." Earthquake Engineering
Research Institute Newsletter 13: 64-69.
368. Resendiz, D., M. P. Romo, and E. Moreno. January 1982. "El Infiernillo
and La Villita Dams: Seismic Behavior." Journal of the Geotechnical
Engineering Division 108, No. GT1: 109.
369. Riddell, R., S. L. Wood, and J. Carlos de la Llera. April 1987. "The 1985
Chile Earthquake, Structural Characteristics and Damage Statistics for the
Building Inventory in ViEa del Mar." Urbana, Illinois: University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
370. Ridgeway, R. September 1977. "In Earth's Way." Earthquake Engineering
371. Rios, R. Jr., J. Vargas, P. Hradilek, and M. Duke. March 1979. "Damage
Information Report on the February 15, Earthquake in Peru." Earthquake
Engineering Research Institute Newsletter
13: 43-44.
372. Rojahn, C., G. E. Brogan, and D. B. Slemmons. May 1978. "Preliminary
Report on the San Juan, Argentina Earthquake of November 23, 1977."
373. Rojahn, C., G. E. Brogan, and D. B. Simmons. January 9-12, 1978.
"Preliminary Report of the San Juan, Argentina Earthquake of November 23,
1977." Paper presented at the Central American Conference on Earthquake
Engineering. San Salvador, El Salvador.
374. Rojahn, C. and B. J. Morrill. April 1977. "The Island of Hawaii
Earthquakes of November 29, 1975: Strong Motion Data and Damage
Reconnaissance Report." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America
67: 493-515.
375. Rojahn, C. and B. J. Morrill. February 1976. "Preliminary Report on the
Island of Hawaii Earthquake of November 29, 1975." Earthquake Engineering
376. Rosenbl ueth, E. January 1986. "The Mexican Earthquake: A Firsthand
Report." Civil Engineering: 38-40.
377. Salem, M. M. et al. November 30, 1987. "November 23 & 24, 1987 El Centro
Earthquake." Investigation notes.
21-27
10446175
378. Sarogoni, R. G. August 1987. "March 5, 1987 - Antofagasta, Chile
Earthquake." Earthquake Engineering Research Institute Newsletter 21, No.
8: 1.
379. Schiff, A. J. 1980. Pictures of Earthquake Damage to Power Systems and
Cost-effective Methods to Reduce Seismic Failures to Electric Power
Equipment. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue Research Foundation.
380. Schiff, A. J. and J. T. P. Yao. n.d. "Response of Power Stations to the
San Fernando Valley Earthquake of 9 February 1971." Report 72-1.
Lafayette, IN: Purdue University: 1-44.
381. Scholl, R. E. September 1981. "Lessons Learned from Recent Earthquakes."
Proceedings of the Fiftieth Annual Convention of the Structural Engineers
Association of California. Coronado, CA: 10-12.
382. Scholl, R. E. February 1974. "Statistical Analysis of Low-rise Building
Damage Caused by the San Fernando Earthquake." Bu77etin of the
383. Scott, H. P. June 1964. "Electrical Damage and Restoration in Alaska."
Electrical Construction and Maintenance.
384. "Severe Earthquake Shakes Major Construction Site." 1986. · Schadenspiegel:
Losses and Loss Prevention. No. 1: 1-9. Munich, West Germany.
385. Shah, H. C. et al. July 1983. "The Coalinga, California Earthquake of May
2, 1983: Commercial District Damage." Earthquake Engineering Research
386. Sharp, R. V. n.d. "The Borrego Mountain Earthquake of April 9, 1968."
Geological Survey Professional Paper 787. Washington, DC: United States
Department of the Interior.
387. Sharpe, R. L. and R. P. Gallagher. September-October 1972. "Needed:
Seismic Design of Mechanical and Electrical Equipment."
388. Shepherd, R. December 1987. "The October 1, 1987 Whittier Narrows
Earthquake." Bu77etin of the New Zealand National Society for Earthquake
Engineering 20, No. 4: 255.
389. Shibata, H. January 13-18, 1969. "Observation of Damages of Industrial
Firms in Niigata Earthquake." Proceedings of the Fourth World Conference
on Earthquake Engineering. Vol. 3. Santiago, Chile: 1-19.
390. Shibata, H. et al. n.d. "On Some Results on Response Observation of
Liquid Storage Tanks to Natural Earthquakes." Earthquake Behavior and
Safety of Oil and Gas Storage Facilitfes, Buried Pipelines, and Equipment.
Teoman Ariman, ed.
391. Singh, S. G. 1983. Memo to A. B. Bonner on earthquake-related damage to
Coalinga Water District.
392. Smith, E. June 26, 1987. Letter to Peter Yanev. Attachment of
Seismological Orientation regarding Bay of Plenty, New Zealand Earthquake
of March 2, 1987. Edgecumbe, New Zealand.
21-28
10446175
393. Smolka, Dr. A. n.d. "EaPthquake Mexico '85."
394. Smolka, Dr. A. and J. Eber. May 1981. "Earthquake in Southern Italy,
November 23, 1980." Earthquake Engineering Research Institute Newsletter
15: 81-92.
395. Snyder, A. I. April 1972. "Pressure Vessels, Piping Withstood Quake, The
Lesson of San Fernando I I." Ca 1iforni a Safety News.
396. Solozano, E. January 1973. Translation of Report of Damages During
Managua Earthquake. Prepared by ENALUF.
397. Southern California Edison Company. May 1971. "Geotechnical Report, San
Fernando Earthquake 9 February 1971."
398. Southern California Edison Company, System Operation Division. 1971.
"Power Supply Department and Customer Service Department Earthquake Damage
Report, February 9, 1971 Historical Record."
399. Southern California Edison Company, Task Force on Earthquake Design
Criteria. May 1971. "San Fernando Earthquake, Report of Damage to System
Facilities."
400. Sozen, M.A. and J. Roesset. 1976. "Preliminary Notes on Structural
Damage Caused by Guatemala Earthquakes of 4 and 6 February 1976."
401. Spyropoulos, P. J. February 1982. "Report on the Greek Earthquakes of
February 24-25, 1981." Concrete International: 11-15.
402. Stanford University, Department of Civil Engineering, Graduate Student of
Class CE282B- Civil Engineering. 1984. "Morgan Hill, California
Earthquake of April 24, 1984: A Preliminary Damage Report." Stanford, CA.
403. State of California, Division of Mines and Geology. 1975. "San Fernando,
California, Earthquake of 9 February 1971." Gordon B. Oakeshott, ed.
Bulletin 196. Sacramento, CA.
404. State of California, Division of Mines. 1959. "San Francisco Earthquakes
of 1957." Special Report 57. San Francisco, CA.
405. State of California, Department of Natural Resources, Department of Mines.
1955. "Earthquakes in Kern County California During 1952." Olaf P.
Jenkins and Gordon B. Oakeshott, ed. Bulletin 171.
406. State of California Earthquake Investigation Commission. 1906.
"Preliminary Report of the State Earthquake Investigation Commission."
Oakland, CA.
407. Stein, L. n.d. "Reconnaissance Report: Santa Barbara Earthquake, August
29, 1978."
408. Steinbrugge, K. V. 1982. Earthquakes, Volcanoes, and Tsunamis: An
Anatomy of Hazards. Baltimore, MD: Waverly Press.
21-29
10446175
409. Steinbrugge, K. V. and E. E. Schader. 1979. "Mobile Home Damage and
Losses, Santa Barbara Earthquake, August 13, 1978." Report SSC-79-06 for
the Seismic Safety Commission. Sacramento, CA.
410. Steinbrugge, K. V., E. E. Schader, H. C. Bigglestone, and C. A. Weers.
1971. "San Fernando Earthquake, February 9, 1971." San Francisco, CA:
Pacific Fire Rating Bureau.
411. Steinbrugge, K. V., W. K. Cloud, and N. H. Scott. n.d. "The Santa Rosa,
California, Earthquakes of October 1, 1969." Rockville, MD: U.S.
Department of Commerce: 1-44.
412. Steinbrugge, K. V. and R. Flores. February 1963. "A Structural
Engineering Viewpoint." Bu77etin of the Seismological Society of America
53: 225-307. Special Issue: An Engineering Report on the Chilean
Earthquakes of May 1960.
413. Steinbrugge, K. V. and W. K. Cloud. April 1962. "Epicentral Intensities
and Damage in the Hebgen Lake, Montana, Earthquake of August 18, 1959
(GCT)." Bu77etin of the Seismological Society of America 52: 181-235.
414. Steinbrugge, K. V. and V. R. Bush. July 11-18, 1960. "Earthquake
Experience in North America, 1950-1959." Proceedings of the Second World
Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Vol. 1. Tokyo and Kyoto, Japan:
381-397.
415. Steinbrugge, K. V. and R. W. Clough. July 11-18, 1960. "Chilean
Earthquakes of May, 1960: A Brief Trip Report." Proceedings of the Second
World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Vol 1. Tokyo and Kyoto,
Japan: 629-637.
416. Steinbrugge, K. V. and D. F. Moran. October 1957. "The Dixie Valley-
Fairview Peak, Nevada, Earthquakes of December 16, 1954: Engineering
Aspects." Bu77etin of the Seismological Society of America 47: 299-349.
417. Steinbrugge, K. V. and D. F. Moran. April 1957. "An Engineering Study of
the Eureka, California, Earthquake of December 21, 1954." Bulletin of the
418. Steinbrugge, K. V. and D. F. Moran. January 1956. "Damage Caused by the
Earthquakes of July 6 and August 23, 1954." Bulletin of the Seismological
419. Steinbrugge, K. V. and D. F. Moran. April 1954. "An Engineering Study of
the Southern California Earthquake of July 21, 1952, and Its Aftershocks."
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 44: 201-462.
420. Steinhardt, 0. F. June 23-26, 1985. "Seismic Performance of a
Strengthened 500 kV Circuit Breaker." Vol. 98-4. Proceedings of the 1985
Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference. New Orleans, LA.
421. Steinhardt, 0. W. November 1978. "Protecting a Power Lifeline Against
Earthquakes." Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers.
Vol. 104.
21-30
10446175
422. Stephenson, J. M. 1964. "Earthquake Damage to Anchorage Area Utilities -
March 1964." Port Hueneme, CA: U.S. Naval Civil Engineering Laboratory.
423. Steudel, J. 1982. "The Korinth Earthquakes of February 1981." Reading,
PA: Gilbert/Commonwealth.
424. Stevenson, J. D. 1984. "Evaluation and Summary of Seismic Response of
Above Ground Nuclear Power Plant Piping to Strong Motion Earthquakes."
EPRI Workshop on Nuclear Power Plant Re-evaluation for Earthquakes Larger
Than SSE. Cleveland, OH.
425. Stockton, W. November 5, 1985. "Lessons Emerge from Mexican Quake." New
York Times.
426. Stratta, J. L. 1987. Manual of Seismic Design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
427. Stratta, J. L. January 1981. "Preliminary Report of the Campania-
Basilicata, Italy Earthquake of November 23, 1980." Earthquake Engineering
428. Stratta, J. L. March 1980. "Report of Livermore Earthquakes of January,
1980." Earthquake Engineering Research Institute Newsletter 14: 21-54.
429. Stratta, J. L. October 3-5, 1968. "The Manila Earthquake of August 2nd,
1968." Proceedings of the 31th Annual Convention of the Structural
Engineers Association of Northern California:
154-156.
430. Stratta, J. L., L. E. Escalante, E. L. Krinitzsky, and U. Morelli. n.d.
"Earthquake in Campania-Basilicata, Italy, November 23, 1980: A
Reconnaissance Report." Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
431. Stratta, J. L., and L.A. Wyllie, Jr. 1979. "Reconnaissance Report,
Friuli, Italy Earthquakes of 1976." Berkeley, CA: Earthquake Engineering
Research Institute.
432. Stromberg, P. A., and B. P. Baird. 1979. "Staff Report to the Seismic
Safety Commission on the Hollister- Gilroy Earthquake, August 6, 1979."
433. Structural Engineers Association of Southern California. n.d. "Report on
Olive View Hospital, San Fernando, California Earthquake of February 9,
1971.II
434. Structural Engineers Association of Northern California. n.d. "1952

Earthquakes, Kern County, California."
435. Structural Engineers Association of Northern California. n.d. Seminar
Lectures by Expert Quake Chasers.
436. Structural Mechanics Associates. January 1985. "Current Practice and Past
Experience for the Seismic Design of LNG Storage Tanks in the United
States." Newport Beach, CA.
437. Sun, S. 1980. Earthquake Damage to Lifeline Facilities and Aseismic
Measures. Beijing, China.
21-31
10446175
438. Suzuki, S. and A. S. Kiremidjian. January 1986. "The Mexico Earthquake of
September 19, 1985." Report No. 77. Stanford, CA: Stanford University:
1-67.
439. Suzuki, Z., ed. 1971. General Report on the Tokachi-Oki Earthquake of
1968.
440. Swan, S. W. March 19, 1988. "Pacific-Bell Switching Stations Affected by
the Whittier Earthquake." Trip Report.
441. Swan, S. W. 1983. Memorandum on Equipment Damage for the Coalinga
Earthquake. San Francisco, CA.
442. Swan, S. W. n.d. Memorandum on Post-earthquake Visit to Coalinga. San
443. Swan, S. W. and P. I. Yanev. 1982. "An Evaluation of the Response of
Equipment at the El Centro Steam Plant to the October 15, 1979 Imperial
Valley, California Earthquake." Washington, DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
444. Sylvester, A. G. July 1980. "The Mammoth Lakes, California, Earthquakes,
25-31 May, 1980." Earthquake Engineering Research Institute Newsletter 14:
92-119.
445. Sylvester, A. G. April 1979. "Earthquake Damage in Imperial Valley,
California May 18, 1940 as Reported by T. A. Clark." Bulletin of the
446. Takahashi, S. K. and W. E. Schniete. August 1973. "Preliminary
Investigation of Structural Damage from Point Mugu, California Earthquake
of February 21, 1973." Port Hueneme, CA: Naval Civil Engineering
Laboratory.
447. Tamura, C. March 1986. "Behaviors of Dams in Mexico Earthquake, September
19, 1985 •
II Bulletin of Earthquake Resistant Structure Research Center, No.
19: 53.
448. Tamura, C. 1985 "Outline of Damages from Nihonkai Chubu Earthquake of
1983." Civil Engineering in Japan 24.
449. Tierney, K. September 1985. "Report on the Coalinga Earthquake of May 2,
1983." No. SSC 85-01. Sacramento, CA: State of California. Seismic
Safety Commission.
450. Tilling, R. I. November-December 1976. "The 7.2 Magnitude Earthquake,
November 1975, Island of Hawaii." Earthquake Information Bulletin 8, No.
6.
451. Tokyo Metropolitan Government. 1982. "Research Report of the Southern
Italy Earthquake of November 23, 1980." Tokyo: Makoto Insatsu K.K., 12-
24.
452. Tomblin, J. F. and W. P. Aspinall. December 1975. "Reconnaissance Report
of the Antigua, West Indies Earthquake of October 8, 1974." Bulletin of
the Seismological Society of America 65, No. 6.
21-32
10446175
453. Toppozada, T. R. July 1984. "Morgan Hill Earthquake of April 1984."
California Geology: 146-149.
454. Tzenov, L., P. Sotirov, and H. Boncheva. September 18-22 1978. "Study of
Some Damaged Industrial Buildings due to Vrancea Earthquake." Proceedings
of Sixth European Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Dubrovnick,
Yugoslavia.
455. Ulrich, F. P. June 1949. "Reporting the Northwest Earthquake: From the
Scenic Point of View." Building Standards Monthly:
8-16.
456. Ulrich, F. P. January 1941. "The Imperial Valley Earthquakes of 1940."
Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 31:
13-31.
457. United States - Japan Program in Natural Resources Panel on Wind and
Seismic Effects. 1980. "An Investigation of the Miyagi-ken-oki, Japan,
Earthquake of June 12, 1978." Bruce R. Ellingwood, ed. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Commerce.
458. University of California, Earthquake Engineering Research Center. 1959.
"Preliminary Report Hebgen Lake, Montana Earthquakes August 1959."
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Commerce.
459. University of California, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory. 1980. "The LLNL
Earthquake Impact Analysis Committee Report on the Livermore, California,
Earthquakes of January 24 and 26, 1980." Springfield, VA: National
Technical Information Service.
460. URS/John A. Blume & Associates, Engineers. 1980. "Structural
Investigations for Three California Earthquakes: Coyote Lake, August 6,
1979; Imperial Valley, October 15, 1979; Mt. Diablo, January 24 and 26,
1980." San Francisco, CA.
461. URS/John A. Blume and Associates, Engineers. 1979. "High-rise Building
Damage from the November 1978 Oaxaca, Mexico Earthquake." Washington, DC:
U.S. Geological Survey.
462. URS/John A. Blume and Associates, Engineers. 1979. "Santa Barbara
Earthquake of August 13, 1978, Field Data Report." Prepared for U.S.
Department of Energy. San Francisco, CA.
463. U.S. Department of Commerce, Environmental Science Services Administration,
Coast and Geodetic Survey. 1967. "The Prince William Sound, Alaska,
Earthquake of 1964 and Aftershocks." 3 vols. Fergus J. Wood, ed.
Washington DC: United States Government Printing Office.
464. U.S. Department of Commerce, Environmental Science Services Administration,
Coast and Geodetic Survey. n.d. "The Parkfield, California Earthquake of
June 27, 1966." Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.
465. U.S. Department of Commerce, Coast and Geodetic Survey. n.d. "Earthquake
Investigations in the Western United States, 1931-1964." DeanS. Carder,
ed. Publication 41-2. Washington, DC
21-33
10446175
466. U.S. Department of the Interior. n.d. "The Alaska Earthquake, March 27,
1964: Investigations and Reconstruction." Geological Survey Professional
Paper 541. Washington, DC: United States Government Printing Office.
467. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Alaska District
Office. 1966. "Eklutna and the Alaska Earthquake." Juneau, Alaska.
468. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey. 1980. "Selected
Papers on the Imperial Valley, California Earthquake of October 15, 1979."
Christopher Rojahn, ed. Washington, DC: U.S. Geological Survey.
469. U. S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey. 1976. "Interim
Report on the Guatemalan Earthquake of 4 February 1976 and the Activities
of the U.S. Geological Survey Earthquake Investigation Team." Open-file
Report 76-295. Menlo Park, CA.
470. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey. 1976. "The
Guatemalan Earthquake of February 4, 1976, A Preliminary Report." A. F.
Espinosa, ed. Professional Paper 1002. Washington, DC: United States
Government Printing Office.
471. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. April 1985. "Summary and Evaluation
of Historical Strong-Motion Earthquake Seismic Response and Damage to
Aboveground Industrial Piping." Washington, DC: United States
472. Vallenas, P. 1987. "List of New Zealand Photographs."
473. Vignola, R. and E. Arze. July 11-18, 1960. "Behavior of a Steel Plant
Under Major Earthquakes." Proceedings of the Second World Conference on
Earthquake Engineering. Vol. 1. Tokyo and Kyoto, Japan: 565-579.
474. Vives, A., V. Caruz, and H. San Martin. June 25-29, 1973. "Damage on Low-
Income Housing Due to the Earthquake of July 8th, 1971 in Chile."
Proceedings of the Fifth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering. Rome,
Italy.
475. Wahl, H. W. November 20, 1973. Interoffice Memorandum on the paper by A.
Klopfenstein, and B. Palk on "Effects of the Managua Earthquake on the
Electrical Power System."
476. Wallace, R. E. February 1968. "Earthquake of August 19, 1966, Varto Area,
Eastern Turkey." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 58: 11-
13, 30-45.
477. Wang, K. and T. Okada. March 1984. "Seismic Performance of Medium- and
High-rise Reinforced Concrete Buildings to Tangshan Earthquake 1976."
Bulletin of Earthquake Resistant Structure Research Center 17: 81-93.
478. Watabe, M. n.d. "State of the Art Report on the Damage Features Due to
the Mexican Earthquake of September 19, 1985."
479. Wiechers, A. Z. and A. Z. Wolff. May 1987. "Observations on the September
19, 1985, Earthquake in Mexico City." EERI Newsletter 21, No. 5
480. Wiegel, R. L., ed. 1970. Earthquake Engineering. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
21-34
10446175
481. Wong, L. February 8, 1988. Letter to Mr. Gayle Johnson.
482. Wood, H. 0. April 1933. "Preliminary Report on the Long Beach Earthquake
of March 10, 1933." Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 23:
43-57.
483. Wood, J. H. and P. C. Jennings. December 1971. "Damage to Freeway
Structures in the San Fernando Earthquake." Bulletin of the New Zealand
Society for Earthquake Engineering 4: 347-376.
484. Worthington &Skilling, Consulting Engineers. n.d. "Investigation of
Earthquake and Tidal Wave Damage to Buildings and Structures, U.S. Naval
Station, Adak, Alaska."
485. Wright, R. N. and S. Kramer. 1973. "Building Performance in the 1972
Managua Earthquake." Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
486. Wyllie, L. A., R. N. Wright, M. A. Sozen, H. J. Degenkolb, K. V.
Steinbrugge, and S. Kramer. August 1974. "Effects on Structures of the
Managua Earthquake of December 23, 1972." Bulletin of the Seismological
487. Wyllie, L. A., F. E. McClure, and H. J. Degenkolb. June 25-29, 1973.
"Performance of Underground Structures at the Joseph Jensen Filtration
Plant." Proceedings of the Fifth World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering. Vol. I. Rome, Italy: 62-75.
488. Yamaguchi, H., T. Oda, and I. Okabayashi. July 1980. "A Seismicity of Oil
Tank Foundation." Some Recent Earthquake Engineering Research and Practice
in Japan. Tokyo: Japanese National Committee of the International
Association for Earthquake Engineering.
489. Yamamoto, C. July 1980. "Earthquake Damage Caused by Past Earthquakes and
its Countermeasures on the Public Telecommunication System." Some Recent
Earthquake Engineering Research and Practice in Japan." Tokyo: Japanese
National Committee of The International Association for Earthquake
Engineering.
490. Yamamoto, S. June 25, 1979. "Structural Analysis and Seismic Design of
Oil Storage Tanks." ASME 3rd National Congress on Pressure Vessel and
Piping Technology.
491. Yancey, C. W. C. and A. A. Camacho. September 1978. "Aseismic Design of
Building Service Systems: The State-of-the-Art." Washington, DC: United
States Government Printing Office.
492. Yanev, P. I. March 17, 1987. Letter to Dr. Robert Kasawara.
493. Yanev, P. I. November 1981. "Effects of the Miyagi-Ken-Oki Earthquake on
Reinforced Concrete Structures." Concrete International Design &
Construction 3: 42-48.
494. Yanev, P. I. April 27~29, 1981. "Effects and Implications of Past
Earthquakes on Power Plants." Presented at the American Power Conference,
Chicago, IL.
21-35
10446175
495. Yanev, P. I. November 1975. "The Lice, Turkey, Earthquake of September 6,
1975 (Reconnaissance Report)." Earthquake Engineering Research Institute
Newsletter 9.
496. Yanev, P. I. June 21, 1973. Memo to T. E. Johnson on Point Mugu,
California, Earthquake of 21 February 1973.
497. Yanev, P. I. n.d. "Photographed Sites of Miyagi-Ken-Oki, Japan,
Earthquake of June 12, 1978." San Francisco, CA: URS/John A. Blume &
Associates, Engineers.
498. Yanev, P. I., P. Vallenas, D. Williams, and R. C. Murray. May 1987. "The
Bay of Plenty, New Zealand, Earthquake of March 2, 1987: Reconnaissance
Report." Prepared for The Electrical Power Research Institute. San
499. Yanev, P. I. et al. May 1983. "Visuals for Earthquake Hazard Mitigation
for Utility Lifeline Systems." Prepared for the Federal Emergency
Management Agency. San Francisco, CA: EQE Incorporated.
500. Yanev, P. I., T. A. Moore, and J. A. Blume. n.d. "Fukushima Nuclear Power
Station." San Francisco, CA: URS/John A. Blume & Associates, Engineers.
501. Yasue, T., T. Iwasaki, Y. Sasaki, H. Asanuma, and T. Nakajima. May 17-20,
1982. "Report of the Urakawa-Oki Earthquake of March 21, 1982."
Proceedings of the Fourteenth Joint Meeting, U.S. - Japan Panel on Wind and
.Seismic Effects, UJNR. Washington, DC: 73-86.
502. Zeevaeri, L. February 1964. "Strong Ground Motions Recorded During
Earthquakes of May the 11th and 19th, 1962 in Mexico City." Bu77etin of
the Seismological Society of America 54: 209-231.
21-36
10446175
10446175

NP 7149 D PDF

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

NP 7149 D PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EPI21 EPRI NP-7149-D

Final Report, March 1991

DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND

Printed on Recycled Paper Nuclear Power Division

3 MEDIUM VOLTAGE SWITCHGEAR -

3.4 Sources of Seismic Damage 3-8

9 FANS - SUMMARY OF SEISMIC ADEQUACY 9-1

15 BATTERIES AND RACKS -

20 CONTROL AND INSTRUMENTATION PANELS AND CABINETS -

2-4 Sylmar Converter Station 2-12

3-8 Medium voltage switchgear assemblies mounted in outdoor

3-10 IBM/Santa Teresa Facility 3-19

4-8 Examples of transformers in the area affected by the 1983

4-9 Dry-type transformers at the Evergreen College in Morgan

5-3 A typical reciprocating-piston pump 5-12

5-8 Horizontal, single-stage, centrifugal pumps at the Valley

5-9 Horizontal pumps at sites affected by the 1985 Chile

7-5 Diaphragm-operated valves at the Valley Steam Plant and

7-13 Hydraulic piston-operated valves at the Pleasant Valley

8-2 Components of a typical solenoid-operated valve 8-7

8-4 There are about 35 Limitorque motor-operated valves at

This report provides the following information:

• Defines twenty generic classes of nuclear plant equipment that can

I. DEVELOPMENT OF THE SEISMIC EXPERIENCE DATA BASE

A pilot program to demonstrate the feasibility of using earthquake experience in

"(Our) assessment leads to the conclusion that the use of experience

• Equipment in nuclear plants is generally similar and at least as

The primary purposes of the seismic experience data base are:

• Fossil-fueled power plants

In general, data collection efforts focused on facilities located in the areas of

• Interviews with the facility management and operating personnel

Standard procedures used in surveying data base facilities focus on collecting

• Construction: the physical structure of the equipment, including

In defining equipment classes the following general guidelines were followed:

• Each class encompasses the broadest range of equipment included in

• Highest seismic motion

The generic seismic qualification spectrum is based on the free-field ground

IV. SUMMARIES OF SEISMIC ADEQUACY FOR GENERAL EQUIPMENT CLASSES

Definition of Equipment Class

Data Base Representation

Sources of Seismic Damage

In compiling the seismic experience data base, certain vulnerabilities have

References used to generate the equipment description, as well as manufacturer's

San Fernando, CA Sylmar Large electrical substation 0.50-0.75

* Ground acceleration measured by an instrument at the site

Humboldt, CA Humboldt Bay Two gas-fired units 0.25

Morgan Hill , CA San Martin Winery 0.35

* Ground acceleration measured by an instrument at the site

Chile Earthquake Oxiquim Chemical facility producing 0.30

* Ground acceleration measured by an instrument at the site

North Palm Devers Large electrical 0.85*

Whittier, CA SCE Large office complex 0.42*

* Ground acceleration measured by an instrument at the site

Superstition Mesquite Lake 16 MW gas-fired 0.30

* Ground acceleration measured by an instrument at the site

I. Motor control centers

1. MOTOR CONTROL CENTERS

t""""\ 1.20 Recommended Generic Seiamic

1.1 DEFINITION OF EQUIPMENT CLASS

A control transformer is a small transformer that is often included in a motor

Motor controllers are rated by standards of the National Electric Manufacturers

• Each vertical section is fully enclosed on all sides by sheet metal

Each section of an MCC is a sheet metal enclosure, usually reinforced at its