4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Steel-plate composite (SC) walls for safety related nuclear facilities: Design for in-plane forces and out-of-plane moments

Journal

NUCLEAR ENGINEERING AND DESIGN
Volume 269, Issue -, Pages 240-249

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.nucengdes.2013.09.019

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Purdue University
  2. Bechtel Power
  3. Westinghouse Electric Company
  4. URS

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Steel-concrete (SC) composite walls being considered and used as an alternative to conventional reinforced concrete (RC) walls in safety-related nuclear facilities due to their construction economy and structural efficiency. However, there is a lack of standardized codes for SC structures, and design guidelines and approaches are still being developed. This paper presents the development and verification of: (a) mechanics based model, and (b) detailed nonlinear finite element model for predicting the behavior and failure of SC wall panels subjected to combinations of in-plane forces. The models are verified using existing test results, and the verified models are used to explore the behavior of SC walls subjected to combinations of in-plane forces and moments. The results from these investigations are used to develop an interaction surface in principle force (S-p1 -S-p2) space that can be used to design or check the adequacy of SC wall panels. The interaction surface is easy to develop since it consists of straight line segments connecting anchor points defined by the SC wall section strengths in axial tension, in-plane shear, and compression. Both models and the interaction surface (for design) developed in this paper are recommended for future work. However, in order to use these approaches, the SC wall section should be detailed with adequate shear connector and tie bar strength and spacing to prevent non-ductile failure modes. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available