Problems in the application of the SSHAC probability method for assessing earthquake hazards at Swiss nuclear power plants

Klügel, Jens-Uwe

doi:10.1016/j.enggeo.2005.01.007

Cited by 74 publications

(94 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The basic concept is that the available data shall drive the selection of the probabilistic model used in the analysis. Because the seismic activity is not stationary -the Poisson assumption is in general not applicable to seismic activity (see discussion in [8] and [17]), a time-dependent model has to be applied for the assessment of instantaneous risk. Different time-dependent models have been suggested in the past for site-specific analysis [12] or for the development of time-dependent seismic hazard maps and an intermediate-term earthquake prediction [23].…”

Section: Risk Analysis: Loss Of Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The first risk-based design approach was related to the licensing of the US nuclear power plant Diablo Canyon located close to the Hosgri fault in Central California coast, and not far from the San Andreas fault. The application of the SSHAC procedures outside the USA was facing practical problems both for risk applications as well as for the evaluation of the design of existing nuclear power plants [7,8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Earthquake engineering needs and seismic hazard assessment

Klügel¹,

Mualchin²

2013

WIT Transactions on the Built Environment

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present a detailed discussion on the needs of hazard assessment for different applications of earthquake engineering and risk assessment. This discussion includes design and risk assessment issues. We define the requested information from seismic hazard analysis as an input to a meaningful and economical engineering analysis. This provides the basis for a detailed review of the main methods of contemporary seismic hazard analysis: (1) traditional Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA) as used in building codes of many countries, (2) scenario-based seismic hazard analysis or neo-deterministic seismic hazard analysis (NDSHA) as the principal alternative, and (3) the state of the art physics-based deterministic method.We demonstrate that only the physics-and scenario-based seismic hazard analysis method that combines (a) contemporary seismic waveform modelling, (b) an in-depth geological and seismo-tectonic analysis of the region of interest, and (c) empirical information is able to provide the complete set of input information for economical earthquake engineering analysis that allows to combine improved seismic performance of both the structures and components with reasonable design costs. We show that the scenario-based seismic hazard method can easily be adapted/extended for risk assessment as required in assurance applications by developing state of the art probabilistic data models that are in compliance with observational data assembled in earthquake catalogues.The paper includes a practical example of the scenario-based approach for the development of the design basis of a critical infrastructure and the risk assessment for a seismically induced production loss of a nuclear power plant located in Switzerland.We recommend that DSHA and NDSHA must be used for engineering design. When/if PSHA is required based on national regulations, it is highly recommended to compare the results/output of PSHA results with that of physics-and scenario-based analysis or NDSHA maps.

show abstract

Section: Risk Analysis: Loss Of Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Earthquake engineering needs and seismic hazard assessment

Klügel¹,

Mualchin²

2013

WIT Transactions on the Built Environment

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The publication of the paper "Problems in the application of the SSHAC probability method for assessing earthquake hazards at Swiss nuclear power plants" by Klügel (2005) presents an unusual problem. The paper consists of an extended attack on the methodology and results of a large project (the PEGASOS project, Abrahamson et al 2002) for determining seismic hazard at four Swiss nuclear power plant (NPP) sites.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The reader of Klügel (2005) will thus find many statements about what was done by PEGASOS without any supporting references, and is in the position of being unable to check Klügel's (2005) assertions. Published attacks on unpublished reports are not a normal means of scientific discourse, and we therefore feel a duty to the readership of this journal to present this reply.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Before proceeding to examine Klügel (2005) in detail, it is perhaps worthwhile to start by considering the matter in hand from the point of view of the history and philosophy of science. We may take the generic case where, on one side, there is a large, wellsupported international project involving a carefully selected team of specialists for a period of some years, and on the other side, a single author of limited resources who disagrees with the findings.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluating hazard results for Switzerland and how not to do it: A discussion of “Problems in the application of the SSHAC probability method for assessing earthquake hazards at Swiss nuclear power plants” by J-U Klügel

Musson

Toro²,

Coppersmith³

et al. 2005

Engineering Geology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The PEGASOS project was a major international seismic hazard study, one of the largest ever conducted anywhere in the world, to assess seismic hazard at four nuclear power plant sites in Switzerland. Before the report of this project has become publicly available, a paper attacking both methodology and results has appeared.Since the general scientific readership may have difficulty in assessing this attack in 2 the absence of the report being attacked, we supply a response in the present paper.The bulk of the attack, besides some misconceived arguments about the role of uncertainties in seismic hazard analysis, is carried by some exercises that purport to be validation exercises. In practice, they are no such thing; they are merely independent sets of hazard calculations based on varying assumptions and procedures, often rather questionable, which come up with various different answers which have no particular significance.

show abstract

Analysis of Nuclear Containment Structures; Introduction

Saouma

Hariri-Ardebili

2021

Aging, Shaking, and Cracking of Infrastructures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Problems in the application of the SSHAC probability method for assessing earthquake hazards at Swiss nuclear power plants

Cited by 74 publications

References 10 publications

Earthquake engineering needs and seismic hazard assessment

Earthquake engineering needs and seismic hazard assessment

Evaluating hazard results for Switzerland and how not to do it: A discussion of “Problems in the application of the SSHAC probability method for assessing earthquake hazards at Swiss nuclear power plants” by J-U Klügel

Analysis of Nuclear Containment Structures; Introduction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About