Ground Motion Inputs for the Seismic Shake Table Test

Abstract

Currently, spent nuclear fuel (SNF) is stored in on-site independent spent-fuel storage installations (ISFSIs) at seventythree (73) nuclear power plants (NPPs) in the US. Because a site for geologic repository for permanent disposal of SNF has not been constructed, the SNF will remain in dry storage significantly longer than planned. During this time, the ISFSIs, and potentially consolidated storage facilities, will experience earthquakes of different magnitudes. The dry storage systems are designed and licensed to withstand large seismic loads. When dry storage systems experience seismic loads, there are little data on the response of SNF assemblies contained within them. The Spent Fuel Waste Disposition (SFWD) program is planning to conduct a full-scale seismic shake table test to close the gap related to the seismic loads on the fuel assemblies in dry storage systems. This test will allow for quantifying the strains and accelerations on surrogate fuel assembly hardware and cladding during earthquakes of different magnitudes and frequency content. The main component of the test unit will be the full-scale NUHOMS 32 PTH2 dry storage canister. The canister will be loaded with three surrogate fuel assemblies and twenty-nine dummy assemblies. Two dry storage configurations will be tested – horizontal and vertical above-ground concrete overpacks. These configurations cover 91% of the current dry storage configurations. The major input into the shake table test are the seismic excitations or the earthquake ground motions – acceleration time histories in two horizontal and one vertical direction that will be applied to the shake table surface during the tests. The shake table surface represents the top of the concrete pad on which a dry storage system is placed. The goal of the ground motion task is to develop the ground motions that would be representative of the range of seismotectonic and other conditions that any site in the Western US (WUS) or Central Eastern US (CEUS) might entail. This task is challenging because of the large number of the ISFSI sites, variety of seismotectonic and site conditions, and effects that soil amplification, soil-structure interaction, and pad flexibility may have on the ground motions.