IEEE693 Tutorial3-2007c (Compatibility Mode) PDF

IEEE 693-2005
Recommended Practice for

Seismic Design of Substations
Eric Fujisaki, P.E.

Working Group D4
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

Purpose of This Presentation
 Present an overview of IEEE 693-2005

 Scope
 Organization
 Underlying concepts
 Key requirements
 Not intended to be all-encompassing, or to
cover every aspect or requirement.

Presentation Overview
 Introduction
 References and related documents / standards
 Process of applying IEEE 693
 What’s new in IEEE 693-2005
 Qualification levels
 Performance level and projected performance
 Qualification process
 Installation considerations
 Example of qualification by test
 Future developments
 Closure
3

Some things in substations
don’t react well to
earthquakes

Live Tank CB

Live Tank CB
Also note
anchorage
failure

Current Transformer
Oil spill
7

Transformer Oil Leaks
Note oil
spill
8

Transformer Bushing

Transformer Anchorage
Transformer
fractured its
anchorage and slid
this distance
10

CCVT
11

Circuit Switcher
12

500kV Disconnect Switch
13

Line Trap
Line trap base

failed at connection
to station post
supports
14

Capacitor Rack
15

Arresters
Note flexible boom

supports for arresters
16

Bus Supports
17

Damaged Spares
18

Introduction—What is IEEE 693?
 IEEE 693 defines recommended practices for

the seismic design of substations
 Includes substation equipment / components,
and supports.
 Excludes Class 1E nuclear safety-related
equipment (covered by IEEE 344).
 Refers to other related documents for detailed
design requirements of structures,
anchorages, and foundations.
19

Introduction—
History Before IEEE 693-1997
 No single set of design criteria available—
Each utility develops its own seismic
requirements.
 Ineffective methods and practices.
 Inefficient qualification procedure—
 Manufacturers potentially required to perform
multiple qualifications for same equipment.
 Each utility bears total cost of qualification.
 Lack of uniformity creates roadblocks to
improving equipment performance.
20

Introduction—
History Before IEEE 693-1997
 Several Western U.S. utilities formed ad-hoc
committee: Inter-Utility Seismic Working
Group (IUSWG).
 IUSWG evolved into the Working Group of
the West Coast Substation Subcommittee,
which developed IEEE 693-1997.
 IEEE 693 Working Group (D4) members
include utility engineers, manufacturers,
consulting engineers, academic community.
21

How does IEEE 693 address
these problems?
 Establishes single set of criteria for multiple
users. This is a guiding principle, known within
the Working Group as our “Prime Directive*.”
* There was bound to be a Trekkie in the group.
22

these problems?
 Provides comprehensive
treatment of methods of
qualification, earthquake
inputs, and acceptance
criteria, covering different
types of equipment, in a
single document.
23

these problems?
 Improves effectiveness— requirements are based on
equipment characteristics that affect vulnerability,
observed past earthquake performance, and importance.
24

Improved effectiveness, for example
 Taller, more massive insulators are more
vulnerable.
 Characteristics are associated with higher

voltage classes.
 IEEE 693 imposes stricter qualification

requirements on equipment of higher voltage
classes.
25

these problems?
 Improves efficiency—allows one qualification
test or analysis to serve multiple users.
Images shown on this page ©2007 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
26

The Scope of IEEE 693 and
Related Documents
 Seismic design requirements are defined by a suite
of standards, codes and guides.
 IEEE 693—Equipment, and its “first support*.”
 IEEE 1527—Flexible cable conductors.
 ASCE Substation Structure Design Guide—
Structures beyond “first support*” and anchorages.
 Model building codes—Buildings and foundations in
the substation (may depend on local jurisdiction).
 Material based design specifications/ codes
* “First support” is the primary above ground support of the equipment.
27

The “First Support”
Meaning of First
Type of Equipment
Support
Stand alone equipment (e.g.,
Entire support
CCVT on pedestal, switch on
structure.
low-profile support).
Equipment on racks, A- Member(s) upon
frames, or dead-ends that which the equipment
support other equipment or is attached, and its
pull-off loads. connections.
28

First Support
(entire
frame)
First
Support
(pedestal)
29

First Support for

switches (Beams
and their
connections)
30

References and Related
Standards
31

References and Related Standards
 IEEE 1527-2006— Recommended Practice for Design
of Flexible Buswork in Seismically Active Areas.
 Substation Structure Design Guide, American Society of
Civil Engineers, Reston, VA.
 Model Building Codes, e.g.,
 International Building Code (IBC)
 Uniform Building Code (UBC)
 Manual de Diseño de Obras Civiles (MDOC)
 National Building Code of Canada (NBC)
32

References and Related
Standards (cont’d)
 Material-based codes and specifications, e.g.,
 Specification for Structural Steel Buildings,
American Institute of Steel Construction.
 Building Code Requirements for Reinforced
Concrete, ACI 318, American Concrete
Institute.
 Aluminum Design Manual, ADM 1-516199,
Aluminum Association.
33

How to Apply and Specify
IEEE 693
34

Applying IEEE 693
 Performance Goals
 Process Overview
 Organization of the standard
 How to specify IEEE 693
35

Applying IEEE 693—
Performance Goals
 No damage to qualified equipment and
structures following design earthquake.
 Functionality maintained during and after.
 Margin is available to resist effects of
earthquakes > design earthquake (achieved
by applying conservative acceptance criteria
with design earthquake).
36

Organization of the Standard
 Clauses (normative). Discusses requirements
and practices applicable to all equipment.
1. Overview
2. References
3. Definitions
4. Instructions
5. Installation considerations
6. Qualification methods
7. Design considerations
8. Seismic performance criteria for equipment
37

Organization of the Standard (cont’d)
 Annexes A through V (normative and
informative)
 Standard annexes generally applicable to
different equipment, e.g., input spectra, and
detailed test or analysis requirements.
 Qualification requirements applicable to specific
equipment.
 Qualification report templates.
 Informative annexes on various components.
 Guidelines for Purchaser’s specifications.
38

Process Overview Steps (Sect. 1.4)
1. Determine Qualification Level (High, Moderate or

Low), based site seismic hazard, soil, etc.
 Purchaser/ Utility specifies Qualification Level in
procurement documents, OR
 Manufacturer selects Qualification Level in order
to pre-qualify equipment.
2. Determine required qualification method (test or
analysis) per appropriate Annex. Varies with
equipment type / class, and Qualification Level.
39

Process Overview Steps (cont’d)
3. Execute qualification procedure. If necessary,
make design changes to correct deficiencies.
4. Prepare documentation: Seismic qualification
report and seismic outline dwg.
5. Submit documentation for acceptance by
equipment Purchaser / Utility.
6. Purchaser / Utility receives and installs
equipment in accordance with conditions of its
seismic qualification.
40

Applying IEEE 693— How to Specify
(Sect. 4.2, 5.5, Annex U)
 Specify IEEE 693 in its entirety, without
alteration.
 Example: “The circuit breaker shall be qualified
to the requirements of IEEE 693-2005, and shall
meet the requirements of the High qualification
level.”
 Maintain the “single set of criteria”—Do not pick
and choose parts of the standard.
41

Applying IEEE 693— How to Specify
(Sect. 4.2, 5.5, Annex U)
 Also specify:
 Type of equipment that matches one
described in Annex C through P. Otherwise,
specify Annex B.
 Qualification Level (High, Moderate, or Low).
 Description of support structure to be used, or
alternative means for accounting for effects of
support flexibility.
 Schedule for completion of the qualification.
42

What’s New in
IEEE 693-2005
43

What’s New in IEEE 693-2005
 Inherently acceptable equipment (A.1.4).
 Grandfathering and items qualified to a
previous version of IEEE 693 (Sect. 1.4,
1.4.1).
 Composite insulator acceptance criteria
(A.4.4).
 Input motion specifications for shake table
testing (A.1.2.2).
44

 Qualification by “inherently acceptable”
clause was added.
 Applies to most equipment rated at < 35kV.
 Based on favorable performance of
equipment in this class.
 Design anchorages for equivalent static
seismic loading 1g horizontal + 0.8g vertical.
45

 Existing qualification/ qualified to another
standard is considered valid if:
 User and Specialist signing the report agree in
writing that existing qualification meets or
exceeds IEEE 693.
 Technical justification is provided and
appended to the qualification report.
46

 Equipment qualified to IEEE 693-1997 or later
is considered valid if:
 Item is not explicitly excluded in the current
version of IEEE 693.
 Explicitly excluded items are brought into
compliance with requirements of the current
version of IEEE 693.
Note: In IEEE 693-2005, only composite insulator shed

seal test is explicitly excluded.
47

 Previous composite insulator shed seal tests
are explicitly excluded, therefore previous
qualifications are not valid. New procedure:
 Apply static cantilever load at 50% SML for 2
minutes.
 Heavily coat or submerge bottom (i.e., high
moment) end with penetrating dye.
 Release load, cut end of insulator in transverse
and longitudinal directions, and inspect for
penetration of dye.
48

 New composite insulator shed seal test

 Better measure of performance—penetration
checked with insulator under load.
 Performed independently of shake table test—
Can be done at any time.
 Still a design test—One test covers all
insulators with same seal design.
49

 Input motion specifications for shake table
testing were revised
 Pre-approved sets of standard time histories
(one numerically synthesized, one empirically-
based), were developed and available upon
e-mail request to [email protected].
 Other time histories may be developed and
used, if meeting the requirements of A.1.2.2.
50

Qualification Levels
51

Qualification Level (Sect. 8.3)
 IEEE 693 establishes 3 Qualification Levels
 High (defined by Required Response Spectra, RRS)
 Moderate (defined by RRS)
 Low (defined by peak ground acceleration)
 Discrete levels simplify qualification procedure

and interchangeability of equipment
 Equipment Purchaser decides on appropriate
Qualification Level based on site seismic
hazard
52

Response Spectrum Defined
Sa (f 1) Sa (f 2) Sa (f n)
Maximum
acceleration
response of
oscillator = Sa( f )
f1 f2 … fn
Single-degree-of-
freedom oscillators, with
0.6
0.4
different frequencies f 1,
Earthquake 0.2
0.0
f 2, … f n, and a given
Ground Motion -0.2
-0.4
damping ratio.
-0.6
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
53

Response Spectrum
Response Spectrum
Plot of (Sa ) of
oscillators of varying
Sa(f 2)
frequencies ( f )
defines the response
Sa(f n)
spectrum for the
Sa(f 1)
given earthquake
motion.
f1 f2 … fn
Frequency
54

Response Spectrum—ZPA and PGA
Peak ground
acceleration (PGA)
Spectral 0.6
Accel Sa 0.4
0.2
0.0
-0.2
Zero- -0.4
period ZPA = PGA

-0.6
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
accel Earthquake ground

(ZPA) motion time history
Frequency (acceleration vs. time)
The maximum response of a rigid (i.e., high frequency) structure

connected to the ground is the same as the peak ground acceleration.
55

Response Spectrum—
Damping Effects
Lowest
damping
Spectral
Accel Sa
Highest
damping
Frequency
Higher damping = More energy dissipation = Lower response

56

Qualification Level—IEEE 693 Required
Response Spectrum (RRS) Shapes (Sect. 8.3)
 Broadband spectral shape

 Intended to account for effects of different
sites (soft soil to rock)
 Does not represent any single earthquake
 Same spectral shape for High and Moderate
Qualification Levels, but anchored to different
PGA
57

Qualification Level (Sect. 8.6)
IEEE 693
Seismic Hazard at ZPA of IEEE
Qualification
Installation Site 693 Spectrum
Level
High PGA > 0.50g 0.50g
Moderate 0.1g < PGA ≤ 0.50g 0.25g

0.1g
Low PGA ≤ 0.10g
(No spectrum)
PGA = Peak Ground Acceleration

ZPA = Zero-Period Acceleration
58

Qualification Level—High RRS,
2, 5, 10% damping (Figure A.1)
2
1.5
Sa (g)
1
0.5
0
0.1 1 10 100
Frequency (Hz) 59

Qualification Level— Moderate RRS,
2, 5, 10% damping (Figure A.2)
1
0.75
Sa (g)
0.5
0.25
0
0.1 1 10 100
Frequency (Hz) 60

Qualification Level—
Selecting the Appropriate Level
 Seismic Hazard Method (Sect. 8.6.1)
 More general; can be used anywhere
 Analysis of seismological data needed
 Seismic Exposure Map Method (U.S., Sect.
8.6.2)
 Requires ASCE 7 or NEHRP hazard maps
 May be more conservative than Seismic
Hazard Method
 Similar Exposure Map methods available for
Canada and Mexico
61

Seismic Hazard Method (U.S.)
 Develop mean + 1σ maximum magnitude
earthquake spectrum* for the site, including
effects of local site soil conditions.
 Use PGA to establish Qualification Level:
 PGA > 0.5g, Use High Level.
 0.1g < PGA ≤ 0.5g, Use Moderate Level.
 PGA ≤ 0.1g, Use Low Level.
* Alternative: Use Maximum Considered Earthquake

(MCE) as defined by ASCE 7.
62

Qualification Level—Seismic
Exposure Map Method (U.S.)
 Locate site on ASCE 7 maps, and determine the
Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE)
spectral acceleration at T = 0.2 sec. (Ss ) for Site
Class B (T = 1 / frequency).
 Compute Fa Ss for the appropriate soil class (A
thru F) present at the site.
 A—Hard rock
 B—Rock
 C—Very dense soil/ soft rock
 D—Stiff soil
 E—Soft soil
 F—Soil requiring special investigation
63

Qualification Level—Seismic
Exposure Map Method (U.S., cont’d)
 Compute PGA = Fa Ss / 2.5.
 Use PGA to select Qualification Level:
 PGA > 0.5g, Use High Level.
 0.1g < PGA ≤ 0.5g, Use Moderate Level.
 PGA ≤ 0.1g, Use Low Level
64

Seismic Exposure Map Spectrum
Sa
Fa Ss
Fa Ss PGA = ZPA =
2.5
PGA
T = 0.2 sec Period T (sec)

65

Suggestions for Utilities
 If site-specific spectra exceed 2 x IEEE 693 RRS in
frequency range of equipment to be qualified, should
consider qualifying to a higher level.
 Divide service territory into large zones for High,
Moderate or Low Qualification Levels.
 If site PGA falls in high end of Moderate Level
range, should conservatively use High Qualification
Level for that site to reduce risk of unfavorable
performance.
 Utility has prerogative to set the Qualification Level
for a site, and accept more or less risk.
66

Performance Level and
Projected Performance
67

Projected Performance (Sect. 8.4)
What about sites that have seismic hazard > the
corresponding IEEE 693 Qualification Level?
IEEE 693 ZPA of the
Seismic Hazard at
Qualification IEEE 693
Installation Site
Level Spectrum
High PGA > 0.50g 0.50g
Moderate 0.1g < PGA ≤ 0.50g 0.25g
Demand Demonstrated
Capacity
68

 IEEE 693 uses conservative acceptance
criteria (allowable stress design) for RRS
loading.
 Equipment qualified to RRS is expected to be
capable of performing acceptably at a level
above the RRS.
 That level is known as the Performance
Level, or PL.
 IEEE 693 intends that the PL = 2 x RRS, but
not a guarantee or certainty.
69

High Performance Level Spectra,
2, 5, 10% damping
42
1.5
3
Sa (g)
21
0.5
1
0
0.1 1 10 100
Frequency (Hz) 70

Moderate Performance Level Spectra,
2, 5, 10% damping
2
1.5
Sa (g)
1
0.5
0
0.1 1 10 100
Frequency (Hz) 71

 Must test equipment to PL for better assurance
that it will perform acceptably at the PL.
 Without actual test to PL, its performance can
only be Projected from results of a lower level
test.
 Projected Performance is based on results of
a lower level test, and understanding of the
critical failure modes.
 Understanding of critical failure modes is never
complete, therefore we are always uncertain
about accuracy of Projected Performance.
72

 Why not test all equipment to PL?
 Shake tables may be unable to deliver the
required acceleration levels.
 Testing close to failure of brittle materials
(e.g., porcelain) is hazardous.
 Expensive equipment may have to be
scrapped after PL test even if equipment
passes.
 However, test to PL provides better
assurance of equipment performance.
73

Qualification Process
74

Qualification Process
 Methods of Qualification
 Grandfathered (Sect. 1.4)
 Inherently acceptable (Annex A.1.4)
 Test (Annex A.1.2)
 Analysis (Annex A.1.3)
 Acceptance Criteria (Annex A.2)

 Qualification by Group (Sect. 4.7)
 Supports (Sect. 5.5)
 Types of equipment (Annex C-P)
 Documentation (Annex S, T)
75

Qualification by Test—
Resonance Search
 Required as the first and last test in every
qualification requiring a dynamic test.
 First test is used to identify frequencies of
vibration and damping of the equipment.
 Last test is used to assess damage to
equipment from other prior dynamic tests, by
comparing result with first resonance search.
 Excites the equipment at very low levels.
 Sine sweep or white noise tests are typically
used.
76

Time History Shake Table
 Simulates shaking from earthquake.
 Required for most equipment in higher voltage
classes.
 Triaxial (3 components of earthquake applied
concurrently) test is preferred, but biaxial (1
horizontal + vertical component) also allowed.
 Input motion must meet Annex A.1.2.2
requirements. Use pre-approved input motions,
or develop new spectrum-compatible time
histories per A.1.2.2.
 Equipment functionality verified during/ after test.
77

Qualification by Test
 Resonance search
 Time history shake table Dynamic Tests
 Sine beat
 Static pull
78

Qualification by Test—Sine Beat
 Dynamic test designed to excite a single
frequency at a time.
 Input motion consists of five 10-cycle impulses,
separated by enough time for equipment to
come to rest.
 Applied to excite the most important 3 or 4
modes of vibration in each direction, as
identified by resonance search tests.
 Used for high voltage circuit breaker
qualification.
79

Qualification by Test—Static Pull
 Cantilever load test for insulators, bushings,
cable terminations, and other components.
 May be pull and hold, or snap-back.
 Verify strength of component.
 Calibrate strain gages or deflection
measurements prior to dynamic tests.
 May be used to assess equipment/ component
properties such as stiffness, frequency of
vibration, or damping.
80

Qualification by Test—Advantages
 Addresses many uncertainties that cannot be
modeled adequately.
 Reveals weaknesses or behavior that could not
be predicted by analysis.
 Provides the only means of confirming
functionality of equipment.
 Improves confidence in performance.
81

Problems and Issues
 Result is binary (pass/ fail). Difficult to assess
margin available without testing to PL.
 Costly, and requires significant lead time.
 Impossible to instrument every component;
sometimes difficult to identify critical locations to
instrument.
 Shake table may be unable to achieve required
input motions without filtering.
82

Qualification by Analysis
 Static
 Static coefficient
 Dynamic
83

Qualification by Analysis—
Static Analysis
 Simplest type of analysis.
 Seismic loading defined as mass x specified
coefficient.
 Equipment typically is rigid, or exhibits single-
mode behavior.
 Past earthquake performance has been
favorable when using this method.
 Used for low to medium voltage, simple, or
historically rugged equipment.
84

Static Coefficient Analysis
 Seismic loading defined as mass x peak of
the 2%-damped RRS x 1.5.
 Equipment typically is flexible, and may
exhibit multi-mode behavior.
 Used for low to medium voltage, relatively
simple equipment.
85

Dynamic Analysis
 Seismic loading is defined by 2%-damped RRS, or
RRS-compatible time histories.
 Extract and include sufficient number of modes to
achieve 90% of effective modal mass.
 Use approved modal combination scheme such as
complete quadratic combination (CQC).
 Use 3-D analysis, with SRSS earthquake
component combination scheme.
 Used for medium voltage, complex, flexible, multi-
mode equipment.
86

Comments and Cautions
 Many uncertainties in analysis. Quality of result is
dependent on analyst’s skill and judgment.
 Complex parts cannot be modeled without
substantial effort; result may be unreliable.
 Reliability of analysis is greatly improved with
limited testing to determine properties, and to
validate correctness of model behavior.
 Cannot verify functionality of equipment.
 Still a valuable tool; necessary to include some
analysis with almost every test.
87

Methods of Qualification per Voltage Class (kV)
Time
Inherently Static Coeff. Dynamic
Equipment Type History
Acceptable Analysis Analysis
Test
Circuit Breaker < 35 35 to < 121 121 to < 169 ≥ 169 (1)
Air Disconn. Switch < 35 35 to < 121 121 to < 169 ≥ 169
Instrument
< 35 (2) 35 to < 69 (2) 69 to < 230 (2) ≥ 230 (2)
Transformer
Air Core Reactor < 35 35 to < 115 ≥ 115 --
Circuit Switcher < 35 35 to < 121 121 to < 169 ≥ 169
Surge Arrester < 35 (3) 35 to < 54 (3) 54 to < 90 (3) ≥ 90 (3)
Metalclad Swgr < 35 -- ≥ 35 --
Gas Insulated Swgr < 35 35 to < 121 121 to < 169 ≥ 169 (1)
Capacitor < 38 38 to < 230 ≥ 230 --
(1) Also requires sine beat test
(2) Time history shake table test required when height of equipment on support ≥ 20 ft.
(3) Duty cycle voltage rating 88

Methods of Qualification per Voltage Class (kV)
Time
Equipment Inherently Static Static Pull
Load Path History
Type Acceptable Analysis Test
Test
35 to <
Transformer < 35 ≥ 115 -- --
115
Transformer
< 35 -- -- 35 to < 161 ≥ 161
Bushing
Cable
< 35 -- -- 35 to < 220 ≥ 220
Termination
89

Methods of Qualification
Time
Equipment Inherently Static Dynamic
History
Type Acceptable Analysis Analysis
Test
All units
Batteries installed per -- -- --
Annex J
Non-rigid Non-rigid
Battery Rigid or
-- with 2 with ≥ 3
Racks any 1 stack
stacks stacks
90

Qualification Process—
Acceptance Criteria (Annex A.2)
 IEEE 693 recognizes both Allowable Stress
Design (ASD) and Load and Resistance
Factor Design (LRFD) where appropriate*.
C = 1.0 D + 1.0 ERRS + 1.0 OP (ASD)

Uφ = 1.2 D + 1.4 ERRS + 1.0 OP (LRFD)
Uφ = 0.9 D + 1.4 ERRS + 1.0 OP (LRFD)
* “Where appropriate” means where noted in

Annex A.2.1
91

Acceptance Criteria
In the foregoing:
 C = ASD capacity*
 U = LRFD capacity
Per applicable code
or specification
 φ = Resistance factor
 D = Dead load
 ERRS = Earthquake load from RRS
 OP = Operating load
* 33% increase in allowable stress is no
longer permitted
92

Acceptance Criteria Highlights
(Annex A.2.1.a thru A.2.1.i)
 Porcelain insulators—Loads/ stresses ≤ 50% of
ultimate strength of porcelain.
 Composite insulators.
 Loads/ stresses ≤ 50% of specified mechanical
load (SML).
 Meet shed seal test.
 Meet test requirements in A.1.2.5, when
subjected to such test.
 Meet allowable deflection limits (A.2.1.b.1.iv)
93

 Steel—Use capacities in AISC ASD or LRFD
specification.
 Aluminum
 ASD—Use capacities in ADM Part 1A for
“Bridge and similar structures.”
 LRFD—Requires calibration consistent with
ADM Part IIB.
 Oil-filled bushings—When qualified by test,
must be tested to PL with no oil leakage.
94

 Components with complex geometry—Evaluate
using “Critical Variable” concept (also see A.3):
 Strain-gage the component in a location where
stresses are indicative of primary loading (strain is
critical variable).
 Perform shake table test of equipment at RRS level.
 Perform static test on component—Load in a manner
consistent with primary loading applied during
shaking. Magnitude of static loading must cause
critical variable (strain) = 2 x value measured in RRS
test.
 Component acceptable if no fracture or deformation
occurs that affects functionality of equipment.
95

Example of Critical Variable
Concept (Annex A.2.1.i, A.3)
 Rotating bearing of support column of circuit

switcher is a complex mechanical part.
 Circuit switcher tested to High Level RRS.
 Use critical variable concept to show that
this part is acceptable for PL loading.
96

Concept
Rotating Bearing
97

Concept
 Static Test Procedure
 Set up rotating bearing in
static test fixture.
 Apply bending moment to
bearing = 2 x RRS bending 2 x MRRS
moment in insulator above
(determined from insulator
strain gages in RRS test).
 Check operability of rotating
bearing, and visually
inspect for damage or
deformation.
98

Qualification by Group (Sect. 4.7)
 Equipment of the same type, having similar
characteristics may be grouped for the purpose
of seismic qualification.
 Successful qualification of the most vulnerable
member of group qualifies all members of group.
 Must have technical justification for:
 Selection of group members
 Selection of most vulnerable member.
 User must agree to grouping and selection of
most vulnerable member.
99

Example—CCVTs Qualified by
Group
 500kV and 230kV units qualified by group.
 500kV CCVT uses 2 capacitors.
 230kV CCVT uses 1 capacitor, otherwise
identical to 500kV unit.
 Controlling failure mode is mechanical
strength of insulator.
 SDOF behavior expected; 500kV unit has
fundamental frequency 1.1 - 8Hz.
 500kV unit is most critical member of
group.
 500kV unit tested and passed, therefore,
group is qualified.
100

Equipment Supports (Sect. 5.5)
 Support may significantly influence seismic
response of equipment.
 Best to qualify equipment on same support used
in service. Exceptions:
 Equipment will be used on a variety of supports.
 Supports too large to be included in test.
 Pre-qualified equipment will be installed on
existing support or other user-specified support.
 Support to be used is unknown at the time of
qualification.
101

Equipment Supports (cont’d)
 Requirements for qualifying without support:
 Support characteristics known—Amplify input
motion to account for effects of support
structure (translation and rotation) x 1.1.
 Support characteristics unknown—Qualify
equipment with inputs amplified by 2.5 factor.
Supports used in installation must be designed
to have amplification factor ≤ 2.25 (considering
translation and rotation).
102

Equipment Supports (cont’d)
 Equipment must be installed with support
used in the qualification
 Same support as used in the qualification.
 Dynamically equivalent or “better” supports
(i.e., supports that will cause the equipment to
have equal or lower response) than used in
qualification.
103

“Dynamically Equivalent or Better”
Support for 230kV Switch?
104

Equivalent Supports
105

Annexes
 Annexes C-P provide detailed qualification
procedures specific to each type of equipment.
 Requirements for different Qualification Levels
 Operational requirements
 Methods for different Qualification Levels
 Procedure for qualification (e.g., which tests,
sequences, monitoring requirements, post-shaking
functional tests)
 Acceptance criteria
 Design requirements
 Reporting requirements
106

Documentation
 Report templates provided for qualification by
analysis (Annex S) or test (Annex T).
 Standard format helps both preparer and user:
 Preparer—ensures that all required information
is extracted and provided
 User—simplifies review process, provides
consistency for reports from different sources
 Seismic outline drawing—Provides summary of
key information on equipment characteristics,
method and level of qualification, and
anchorage design forces.
107

Installation Considerations
108

Installation Considerations—
Interaction of connected equipment
 Equipment connected together will interact with
each other during earthquake.
 Believed to have caused equipment failures in past
earthquakes.
 Degree of interaction depends on the dynamic
characteristics of the individual equipment,
properties of the connecting element, and the
earthquake.
 Current recommended practice is to provide
flexible buswork with sufficient slack to uncouple
the connected equipment.
109

Equipment Qualified as Stand
Alone, But Installed Connected
As-Qualified As-Installed
110

Interaction of connected equipment
 Determine displacement of each equipment
standing alone (i.e., unconnected).
 Combine displacements of two adjacent
connected equipment to obtain slack demand.
 Configure flexible buswork with sufficient slack
supplied. Recommended shapes shown in
Figure 5 of IEEE 693-2005.
 Refer to IEEE 1527 for detailed procedures for
designing flexible buswork.
111

Conductor Slack—Good Slack
112

Conductor Slack—Good Slack
113

Conductor Slack—The Good, the
Bad, and the Ugly
Good
Bad
Ugly
114

Anchorage (Sect. 5.8)
 Anchorage is often the single most cost-effective
means of improving seismic performance.
 Manufacturer is responsible for providing means
for anchoring the equipment, and demand forces
for design.
 Anchor system must withstand seismic and other
loads imposed on the equipment.
 Typical anchor systems
 Welded to embedded metal in the foundation.
 Anchor bolts.
115

Anchorage
Anchored soft drink

vending machine,
Kanazawa, Japan
116

Anchorage Failures
Poorly anchored rail-mounted transformers

117

Anchorage Failures
118

Anchorage
 Recommendations for anchorage
 Anchor bolts should be designed for ductile behavior,
i.e., concrete failure mode strengths > steel strength.
Anchor bolt materials should be ductile.
 Provide reinforcing steel for transfer of anchor bolt
forces if needed.
 Mechanical anchors (e.g., expansion type) are
discouraged. Undercut, or other anchors certified for
seismic loading are preferred.
 Welding to embedded metal in the foundation is
preferred for large equipment.
119

Anchorage
Anchor bolt with reinforcing Welding to steel embedded

steel for force transfer in concrete
120

Example of Qualification
By Test
121

Example—115kV Circuit
Switcher
Interrupter
Horizontal
break
switch
122

Example—115kV Circuit Switcher
Test Set Up
Rigid Platform
Extension Girder
123

Basic Requirements
 Circuit Switcher—Use Annex H.
 High qualification level chosen (H.1.1)
 Operational requirements (H.2)
 No structural damage
 No loss of function
 No mis-operation during earthquake
124

Basic Requirements
 Qualification method (H.3):
 ≥ 169kV, by shake table test
 ≥ 121kV, but < 169kV, by dynamic analysis*
 ≥ 35kV, but < 121kV, by static coefficient
analysis
 Manufacturer chose shake table test in lieu of
dynamic analysis.
 Annex A.1.1 qualification procedures (H.4)
* Note: Circuit switcher rated at 121kV, but used at 115kV by utility

125

Acceptance Criteria
 Meet general requirements of A.2.1, A.2.2
 Meet structural acceptance criteria
 No signs of distress in equipment or support
 Pass functional tests after shaking of A.2.2.1, H.5.2.

 Maintain correct operational state at all times
 Controls and mechanical systems operate properly
 Open properly during operational test
 No leakage from pressurized modules
 Disconnects operate without binding or adjustment
 Resistance across terminals within limits
126

Qualification Test Instrumentation
Pole 1 Pole 2 Pole 3
Accel
X, Y, Z
Accel
Z X, Y, Z
Strain
X Y gages
127

Pole 2, 3
Accel. X, Y, Z
Displ. X, Y
Pole 2, 3
Accel. X, Y, Z
Displ. X, Y
Strain
gages
Strain
gages
Z
Y X
128

Strain gages
Rotating Column
Support Column Base

129

Example—115kV Circuit
Switcher Qualification Test
 Functional monitoring during shake table
tests
 Main switch contact
 Auxiliary switch contact
130

Tests Required
 Time history test, switch closed
 Time history test, switch open
 Time history test, operation
 Post shaking functional tests
131

Equipment Frequencies (Hz)
Direction Middle Pole Outer Pole
2.2
X 3.1
3.0
Transverse to 3.7
3.9
Pole Bases 5.7
5.7
2.3
Y
Not 3.1
Parallel to Pole instrumented 7.3
Bases
7.5
132

Qualification Test Video
133

115kV Circuit Switcher Sample TRS* vs RRS,
Closed Position—X (horizontal)
10.0
* Test Response
Spectrum (TRS),
measured at top of
Spectral shake table
Accel.
1.0
Sa (g)
Lowest modal
frequency x 0.7
0.1
0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0
Frequency (Hz)
134

115kV Circuit Switcher Sample TRS vs RRS,
Closed Position—Y (horizontal)
10.0
Spectral
Accel.
1.0
Sa (g)
Lowest modal
frequency x 0.7
0.1
0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0
Frequency (Hz)
135

115kV Circuit Switcher Sample
TRS vs RRS, Closed Position—Z (vertical)
10.0
Spectral
Accel.
1.0
Sa (g)
0.1
0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0
Frequency (Hz)
136

Seismic Outline Dwg
137

Example—115kV Circuit Switcher—
Summary of Results
 Porcelain insulator stresses (from strain gage
data and insulator properties)—OK
 Rotating bearing assemblies statically tested
to cantilever rating of insulators—OK
 Support structure stresses (from strain gage
data)—OK
 Visual inspection results—OK
 Main and auxiliary contacts monitored during
shaking—OK
 Terminal displacements: 5.6” (X), 7.0” (Y)
138

Summary of Results (cont’d)
 Post-shaking functional tests*
 Operation and dimensional—OK
 SF6 leakage, interrupter pressure integrity—OK
 Timing: Opening and Closing at minimum,
rated, and maximum control voltage—OK
 Resistance values of current-carrying parts—OK
* Same functional tests also performed prior to

shaking.
139

IEEE 693 Future Developments
 A living document. Results of new research or
improvements continue to be added. Some of the
new initiatives:
 Transformer bushing qualification procedures
 Porcelain insulator acceptance criteria
 Terminal load due to connected equipment
 Guidance for testing base-isolated or low-frequency
equipment
 Surge arrester test requirements
 DC equipment
 Anchorage requirements
140

Concluding Remarks
 IEEE 693 is a comprehensive standard for
seismic design of substations.
 Specify it in whole; Don’t alter requirements.
 Use in conjunction with other related
standards and documents.
 Select appropriate support structures.
 Install equipment in accordance with
qualification conditions.
141

What we do is important!
142

Electric Power—A Lifeline*
 Other lifelines depend upon electric power to function
 Importance magnified following large earthquake
 IEEE 693 contributes to a more robust electric power
system
 Enhances public safety
 Hastens restoration of service
 Supports regional economic recovery
 Protects utility assets
* “Systems necessary to provide electric power, natural gas, water and
wastewater, and transportation facilities and services that are essential to
the well being of the community served by these systems” -- from
American Lifelines Alliance
143

Electric Power and Some
Interdependent Lifelines and Services
Water and
Wastewater
Treatment
Firefighting
Hospitals Electric Power System
Transit
Communication
Fuel Supply
144

Thank You!
Questions?
145

IEEE693 Tutorial3-2007c (Compatibility Mode) PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IEEE693 Tutorial3-2007c (Compatibility Mode) 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

IEEE693 Tutorial3-2007c (Compatibility Mode) PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IEEE 693-2005

Recommended Practice for

Eric Fujisaki, P.E.

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

 Present an overview of IEEE 693-2005

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

Line trap base

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

Note flexible boom

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

 IEEE 693 defines recommended practices for

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

* There was bound to be a Trekkie in the group.

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

 Characteristics are associated with higher

 IEEE 693 imposes stricter qualification

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

First Support for

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

1. Determine Qualification Level (High, Moderate or

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

IEEE Substation Committee May, 2011

Note: In IEEE 693-2005, only composite insulator shed