2009 Seismic Design For Cooling Towers

CTI Sponsored Educational Program
Seismic Design Requirements for Cooling Towers

2009 AHR Expo - Chicago
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 1
Presented By:
Panos G. Papavizas, P.E.
Baltimore Aircoil Company
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 2
CTI Mission Statement
To advocate and promote the use of
environmentally responsible Evaporative Heat
Transfer Systems (EHTS) for the benefit of the
public by encouraging:
Education
Research
Standards Development and Verification
Government Relations
Technical Information Exchange
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 3
CTI Objectives
Maintain and expand a broad base membership of
individuals and organizations interested in Evaporative
Heat Transfer Systems (EHTS).
Owner/Operators
Manufacturers
Suppliers
Identify and address emerging and evolving issues
concerning EHTS.
Encourage and support educational programs in various
formats to enhance the capabilities and competence of
the industry to realize the maximum benefit of EHTS.
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 4
CTI Objectives
Encourage and support cooperative research to improve
EHTS technology and efficiency for the long-term
benefit of the environment.
Assure acceptable minimum quality levels and
performance of EHTS and their components by
establishing standard specifications, guidelines, and
certification programs.
Establish standard testing and performance analysis
systems and procedures for EHTS.
Communicate with and influence governmental
responsible technologies, benefits, and issues
associated with EHTS.
Encourage and support forums and methods for
exchanging technical information on EHTS.
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 5
CTI Certification Program
STD-201
The standard sets forth a program whereby the Cooling
Technology Institute will certify that all models of a line
of evaporative heat rejection equipment offered for sale
by a specific Manufacturer will perform thermally in
accordance with the Manufacturers published ratings.
Applies to Mechanical Draft Evaporative Heat Rejection
Equipment such as Cooling Towers, Closed Circuit
Coolers (and Evaporative Refrigerant Condensers).
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 6
Please visit our website at
www.cti.org
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 7
Publication and Presentation Disclaimer 2009
The information contained in the following publication, paper or presentation
is intended for education by the author or presenter, however information
given is in no way an endorsement of the Cooling Technology
Institute. The publication, paper or presentation has been reviewed by the
CTI staff and program committee for commercial content, however there
may be differing opinions regarding the content of information. The
Cooling Technology Institute accepts no liability for its content.
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 8
Seismic Design Requirements
for Cooling Towers
National Seismic Hazard Map
Source: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/topics.php?areaID=7
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 9
Overview
Key Determinants of Seismic Design
Requirements
Seismic Design and Qualification
Requirements
Qualification by Shake-Table Testing
Functional Qualification Considerations
Functional Verification Methodology
Seismic Certification Requirements
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 10
Overview
Evidence of Compliance
System Considerations
Summary
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 11
Building code
Seismic design classification
Level of earthquake safety
Key Determinants of Seismic Design
Requirements
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 12
Building Codes - Nationwide
Source: http://www.iccsafe.org/government/adoption.html
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 13
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 14
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 15
California Code of
Regulations, Title
24
Part 2 known as
California Building
Code
2 volumes
Effective 1/1/2008
Building Code - California
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 16
2007 CBC
incorporates by
adoption the 2006
IBC
CA amendments
in italics
Agency adoption
tables in each
Chapter
Building Code - California
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 17
Seismic Design Provisions of 2006 IBC
1613.1 8cope.
Every structure and portion
thereof, including nonstructural
components that are permanently
attached to structures and their
supports and attachments, shall
be designed and constructed to
resist the effects of earthquake
ground motions in accordance
with ASCE 7
Seismic provisions in
2006 IBC based on
ASCE/SEI 7-05
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 18
Seismic Design Classification
Cooling towers can be treated as either:
Nonstructural components of buildings
Nonbuilding structures
Classification dependent on size and
application
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 19
Seismic Design Classification
Factory
assembled towers
treated as
Nonstructural
Components
Field erected
towers treated as
Nonbuilding
Structures
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 20
Level of Earthquake Safety
Presentation focus factory assembled
towers treated as nonstructural components
Two basic levels of safety for towers treated
as nonstructural components:
Life safety (i.e., position retention)
Post-earthquake functionality
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 21
Position Retention
Intent reduce
hazard to life
resulting from
equipment sliding,
toppling, or falling
Focus on supports
& attachments
Supports Attachments
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 22
Position Retention
Design of tower
structure for
seismic forces may
be required
Typical basis of
qualification is
analysis
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 23
Critical applications
where towers serve
a vital function
Emergency
response centers
Hospitals, etc.
Towers classified as
designated
seismic system
components
Post-Earthquake Functionality
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 24
Intent achieve high
probability that
towers will perform
their intended
function following an
earthquake
Focus on supports,
attachments, and
towers
Supports, Attachments
and Towers
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 25
Design for 50%
higher forces than
those required for
position retention
Design for higher
seismic forces:
Directly affects tower
structural stability and
integrity
Functional reliability
impacted only indirectly
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 26
Seismic Design and Qualification
Requirements of ASCE 7-05
Applicable Chapter and Scope
Key Variables
Exemptions
General Requirements
Special Requirements
Methods of Seismic Qualification
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 27
Applicable Chapter and Scope
Chapter 13
8E8MC DE8GN REOUREMENT8
FOR NON8TRUCTURAL
COMPONENT8
13.1 GENERAL
13.1.1 8cope. This Chapter establishes
minimum design criteria for nonstructural
components that are permanently attached
to structures and for their supports and
attachments
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 28
Key Variables
Key variables that establish specific seismic
design and qualification requirements for
towers:
Seismic Design Category (SDC)
Component importance factor (I
p
)
Design spectral acceleration at short period
(S
DS
)
Tower attachment location in a structure
Unique for each project
Should be provided in the tower spec
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 29
Seismic Design Category
Seismic Design Category
(SDC): A to F
(ASCE 7 Section 11.6; IBC Section
1613.5.6)
Occupancy
Category: I to IV
(ASCE 7 Table 1-1; IBC
Table 1604.5)
Design acceleration:
S
DS
and S
D1
(ASCE 7 Section 11.4; IBC
Section 1613.5)
Cooling Tower SDC
Building
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 30
Component Importance Factor
I
p
= 1.5
Component required to function (i.e., post-
earthquake functionality)
Component failure could impair operation of
facility
Designated seismic system component
I
p
= 1.0
All other towers (i.e., position retention)
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 31
Design Spectral Acceleration (S
DS
)
Design acceleration that cooling towers are
proportioned to resist
Dependent on site soil properties and
mapped spectral acceleration
2/3 of the Maximum Considered Earthquake
(MCE) spectral acceleration
Expressed in gs
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 32
Mapped Spectral Accelerations
Source: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/hazmaps/pdfs/
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 33
Mapped Spectral Accelerations
Source: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/hazmaps/pdfs/
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 34
DS
)
Source: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/hazmaps/design/
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 35
DS
)
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 36
DS
)
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 37
DS
)
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 38
Tower Attachment Location
Seismic acceleration
amplified at point of
tower attachment with
respect to base
Transamerica Building, San Francisco, CA
Source: http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2003/fs017-03/
(Eq. 13.3-1)
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 39
Component Seismic Design Force
0.4S
DS
design ground acceleration
(1 + 2z/h) height amplification
a
p
component amplification
R
p
/I
p
adjusted energy dissipation capability
W
p
component weight
Product is design
acceleration at
attachment point
a
p
= 1.0 rigid, 2.5 flexible
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 40
Exemptions
Towers that meet the following conditions are
exempt from seismic design requirements:
All towers in SDC A and B
Towers in SDC C provided I
p
is equal to 1.0
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 41
All non-exempt towers must meet the
requirements of Section 13.2.1
Section can be satisfied by
Project specific design and documentation
Manufacturers certification of seismic
qualification based on analysis, testing, or
experience data
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 42
13.2 GENERAL DE8GN REOUREMENT8
13.2.1 Applicable Requirements for Architectural, Mechanical
and Electrical Components, 8upports, and Attachments.
Architectural, mechanical, and electrical components, supports, and
attachments shall comply with the sections referenced in Table 13.2-1.
These requirements shall be satisfied by one of the following methods:
1. Project-specific design and documentation prepared and
submitted by a registered design professional.
2. Submittal of the manufacturers certification that the component is
seismically qualified by
a. Analysis.
b. Testing in accordance with the alternative set forth in Section
13.2.5.
c. Experience data in accordance with the alternative set forth in
Section 13.2.6.
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 43
Special Requirements ASCE 7
Special certification required for towers that
must remain operable following an
earthquake
Requirements contained in Section 13.2.2a
Certification must be based on
Shake table testing
Experience data
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 44
13.2.2 8pecial Certification Requirements for Designated
8eismic 8ystems. Certifications shall be provided for designated
seismic systems assigned to Seismic Design Categories C through F as
follows:
a. Active mechanical and electrical equipment that must remain
operable following the design earthquake shall be certified by the
supplier as operable based on approved shake table testing in
accordance with Section 13.2.5 or experience data in accordance
with Section 13.2.6. Evidence demonstrating compliance of this
requirement shall be submitted to the authority having jurisdiction after
review and approval by the registered design professional.
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 45
Limits qualification methods for active
equipment (i.e., equipment with moving or
rotating parts)
Recognized by the code writing community
that it is impractical and often inadequate to
verify functionality by analytical means
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 46
Special Requirements 2006 IBC
Requirements for designated seismic system
components contained in Sections 1708.2
and 1708.5
Qualification can be based on
Shake table test
Three dimensional shock tests
Analytical method
Experience data
Rigorous analysis providing equivalent safety
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 47
1708.2 Testing for seismic resistance. The tests specified in
Sections 1708.3 through 1708.6 are required for the following:
1. The seismic-force-resisting systems in structures assigned to Seismic
Design Category C, D, E or F, as determined in Section 1613.
2. Designated seismic systems in structures assigned to Seismic
Design Category D, E or F.
3. Architectural, mechanical and electrical components in structures
assigned to Seismic Design Category C, D, E or F that are required in
Section 1708.5.
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 48
1708.5 8eismic qualification of mechanical and electrical
equipment. The registered design professional in responsible charge
shall state the applicable seismic qualification requirements for designated
seismic systems on the construction documents. Each manufacturer of
designated seismic system components shall test or analyze the
component and its mounting system or anchorage and submit a certificate
of compliance for review and acceptance by the registered design
professional in responsible charge of the design of the designated seismic
system and for approval by the building official. Qualification shall be by
an actual test on a shake table, by three-dimensional shock tests, by
an analytical method using dynamic characteristics and forces, by
the use of experience data (i.e., historical data demonstrating
acceptable seismic performance) or by a more rigorous analysis
providing for equivalent safety.
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 49
IBC Section 1708.5 and Section 13.2.2a of
ASCE 7 appear to be in conflict
Acceptable methods of seismic qualification
dependent on code interpretation
Proposals to clarify the code are in process
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 50
Summary of Requirements
I
p
= 1.5 I
p
= 1.0 Seismic Design
Category
Applicable Methods of Seismic Qualification for
Cooling Towers
A and B
Exempt Exempt
C
Exempt
Analysis?
Testing
Experience Data
D, E, and F
Analysis
Testing
Experience Data
Analysis?
Testing
Experience Data
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 51
Methods of Seismic Qualification
Analysis Analysis of tower under code-prescribed seismic
design forces. Typically, analysis focused only on anchorage
and main structural components
Testing Full-scale shake table testing in accordance with
ICC-ES AC 156, Acceptance Criteria for Seismic
Qualification by Shake-Table Testing of Nonstructural
Components and Systems (ASCE 7 Section 13.2.5)
Experience Data Seismic suitability determined using
actual earthquake performance data collected in accordance
with a nationally recognized procedure (ASCE 7 Section
13.2.6)
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 52
Qualification by Experience Data
Limitations:
Difficulty of establishing the actual seismic
demand in building applications
Low probability of data being applicable to current
generation of products
Infrequency of strong motion earthquakes
Lack of a nationally recognized procedure for
data collection and application
Use of experience data for seismic
qualification currently not viable
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 53
Shake-table testing most reliable method for
functional qualification of cooling towers
Physical testing of entire unit
Severe test
Standardized test methodology
Test methodology consistent with current
code requirements
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 54
Not always the case
Qualification by shake-table testing for
building applications first appeared in the
1985 edition of the NEHRP provisions
Not used to any significant extent for
mechanical equipment outside the nuclear
industry
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 55
Not always the case
No recognized test methodology suitable for
nonstructural building components until
2000
Tests conducted prior to 2000 hampered by
inconsistent interpretation of building code
requirements
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 56
AC156 first issued in 2000
Developed by Schneider
Electric, Building Seismic
Safety Council, and ICBO
Evaluation Service.
Now maintained by ICC-ES,
Inc.
Most recent edition effective
January 1, 2007
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 57
Suitable for qualification in
accordance with 1997 UBC
and 2006 IBC.
Referenced in ASCE 7-05
and 2003 NEHRP
provisions
Applicable to all types of
equipment
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 58
Functional Verification Requirements of
AC156
4.4 Functional and Operability Requirements: A
listing and detailed description shall be provided of
the functional and operability equipment
requirements and/or tests used to verify pre- and
post-seismic-testing functional compliance.
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 59
Functional Verification Requirements of
AC156
AC156 does not define specific functional
verification requirements
Manufacturer must define:
Functional characteristics of equipment
Specific pre- and post-seismic test
functional verification tests and activities
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 60
AC156 Acceptance Criteria for
Functional Verification
6.7.2 Components with I
p
= 1.5: The equipment is deemed
to be essential to the continued operation of a facility,
and/or essential to maintaining critical life support systems,
and/or contains materials deemed to be hazardous, to
humans or the environment, in quantities greater than the
exempted amounts listed in the code. After completion of
the seismic testing, the UUT shall satisfy the functional
and operational requirements and/or tests specified in
Section 4.4, with equivalent results to those of the pre-
test functional compliance testing of Section 6.3.
Post-test functionality Pre-test functionality
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 61
Functional Characteristics of Cooling
Towers
Reject waste heat by
evaporative cooling
Accomplished
through interaction of
tower sub-systems
Open
Closed
Circuit
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 62
Towers
Sub-systems:
Air moving system
Water distribution
system
Heat transfer
system
Structural system
Open
Closed
Circuit
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 63
Towers
Sub-systems must
remain largely
intact after an
earthquake for
towers to perform
their intended
function
Open
Closed
Circuit
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 64
Functional Verification of Cooling
Towers
Integrity of sub-systems must be verified
to assure functionality
Conduct thermal performance tests before
and after shake-table testing?
AC156 requires equivalent pre- and post-
test functionality
Establishing absolute thermal capability for
seismic qualification is unnecessary
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 65
Comprehensive test and inspection program
that focuses on all tower sub-systems
Tests and inspections must verify:
Air moving system is substantially intact and
delivers equivalent air flow
Mechanical system is not compromised and
can be operated safely
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 66
Tests and inspections must verify:
Water distribution system delivers
equivalent water flow without significant
leaks
Heat transfer system is not structurally or
thermally compromised
Structural system is substantially intact with
only minor yielding or distortion that does
not affect functionality
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 67
Conduct production-type
tests before and after
shake-table testing to
demonstrate equivalent:
Fan/motor performance
Water distribution
Leak tightness
Vibration levels
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 68
Define all functional
verification tests and
inspections in the
seismic test plan
Conduct functional
verification activities
and thorough
inspections at shake-
table test facility
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 69
Document all before
and after test and
inspection results
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 70
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 71
Seismic Certification
Critical towers qualified by shake-table testing
must be certified as operable by the
manufacturer
No specific guidelines in the code for
preparing certificate of compliance
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 72
Recommended to include the following:
Name of the manufacturer
Product line covered by the certificate
The building code (e.g., 2006 IBC)
Reference to AC156 as the test protocol
Performance level (i.e., I
p
= 1.5 for critical
towers)
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 73
Recommended to include the following:
Certified design seismic force coefficient,
F
p
/W
p
Certified S
DS
(design spectral acceleration
parameter at short period) level
Installation restrictions, if any
Product restrictions, if any
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 74
Evidence of Compliance
Certificate of compliance
may not be sufficient in
itself as evidence of
testing and seismic
qualification
All documentation (i.e.,
test plan, lab test report,
calculations, etc.) must
be available for review
and approval
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 75
Functionality
Non-structural
integrity
Structural integrity
Anchorage
integrity
Experience
Data
Testing Analysis
Method
Characteristic
Suitability of Qualification Methods for
Cooling Towers
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 76
Qualification of towers
alone does little to
assure functionality of
critical systems
All components within
critical systems must
receive equivalent
attention
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 77
System qualification
is best directed by the
responsible design
professional
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 78
Summary
The key determinants of seismic design
requirements for cooling towers are
Building code
Seismic design classification
Level of earthquake safety.
The seismic design provisions for cooling
towers are contained in ASCE/SEI 7.
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 79
Summary
The key variables that establish seismic
requirements for towers are
Seismic design category
Component importance factor
Design spectral acceleration at short period
Tower attachment location.
The methods of special seismic certification
for active equipment are limited to testing and
experience data in ASCE 7.
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 80
Summary
The use of experience data is currently not a
viable method of seismic qualification.
The most reliable method of assuring cooling
tower functionality is shake-table testing in
accordance with ICC-ES AC156.
Seismic qualification programs for towers
must consider their unique functional
characteristics.
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 81
Summary
The integrity of tower sub-systems must be
verified to assure functionality.
All components within critical systems must
receive equivalent attention.
January 26, 2009
Slide No.: 82
Questions

2009 Seismic Design For Cooling Towers

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

2009 Seismic Design For Cooling Towers

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

CTI Sponsored Educational Program

Seismic Design Requirements for Cooling Towers

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen