Seismic Design of Mechanical and Electrical Components According to Safety Standard KTA 2201 of the German Nuclear Safety Standards Commission

Conference paper

Abstract

The KTA safety standards not only apply to nuclear power plants but also to other nuclear facilities. The experience gained from retrofitting of structural and non-structural components in nuclear power plants can be applied to other areas where KTA standards are required. When designing and executing according to these standards best practices taken from conventional design often cannot be used. In many cases engineers and contractors are not aware of the additional expenditures involved. Differences between conventional design and design according to KTA standards are shown in the following areas: planning objectives, sources of infor-mation, changes to basis of design, probability levels, and, as an example, anchor-ing of a cable tray support to concrete.

Keywords

Europe Marketing Drilling Tray Undercut 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Taffe, A. et al.: Schulung zur zuverlässigen Ortung von Bewehrung in Stahlbetonbauteilen von Kraftwerken; in: Tagungsband zur DGZfP Jahrestagung 2011; 2011Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Structural Eurocodes Program, European Standards EN 1990 to EN 1999, European Committee for Standardization, Brussels, 2002-2007Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    International Building Code 2012, 2 Volumes, International Code Council, 2011, ISBN 978-1-60983-040-3Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    KTA 2201.1 Design of Nuclear Power Plants against Seismic Events; Part 1: Principles, Version 2011-11, Kerntechnischer Ausschuss (KTA), Köln, 2011Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Leydecker, G.: Erdbebenkatalog für Deutschland mit Randgebieten für die Jahre 800 bis 2008, Stuttgart, 2011, ISBN 978-3-510-95989-1Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    DIN EN 1998-1/NA National Annex - Nationally determined parameters - Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance - Part 1: General rules, Seismic actions and rules for buildings, Berlin, 2011Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Grünthal, G. et al.: Seismic Hazard Assessment for Central, North and Northwest Europe: GSHAP Region 3, Annali de Geofisica, Vol. 42, No. 6 (1999), Pages 999-1011, ISSN 2037-416XGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Leydecker, G.; Kopera, J.: Seismological hazard assessment for a site in Northern Germany, an area of low seismicity, Engineering Geology, Vol. 52 (1999), Pages 293-304, ISSN 0013-7952CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    National Technical Approval Z-21.1-1696 for Hilti undercut anchor HDA for accidental actions, Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik (DIBt), Berlin, 2011Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    [10] National Technical Approval Z-21.1-1646 for fischer-Zykon-Anker FZA-K, FZA, FZA-I for accidental actions, Deutsches Institut für Bautechnik (DIBt), Berlin, 2009Google Scholar
  11. [Web-1]
    http://www.kta-gs.de/, publisher: Kerntechnischer Ausschuss (KTA), data gathered on 25. Jan. 2013Google Scholar
  12. [Web-2]
    http://www.endlager-konrad.de/cln_321/nn_1073268/DE/Themen/Historie/__node.html?__nnn=true, publisher: Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz, data gathered on 25. Jan. 2013 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.WK Consult Hamburg Ingenieure für Bauwesen VBI (inspection engineers) and WKC Hamburg GmbH Planungen im Bauwesen (design office)HamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations