請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/18913完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 江昭皚 | |
| dc.contributor.author | Ching-Ya Tsneg | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 曾靖雅 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-08T01:39:17Z | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2016-10-05 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2016 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2016-08-22 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | 1.中央氣象局全球資訊網。2009。地震百問。台北：交通部中央氣象局。網址: http://www.cwb.gov.tw/V7/knowledge/encyclopedia/eq000.htm。上網日期：2015-10-01。
2.供電處。2000。西元 1999 年九二一大地震輸電鐵塔基礎受損彙總及檢討。台北：台灣電力公司。 3.洪祥瑗、文慶霖、柯明淳、劉季宇、葉錦勳。2007。自來水地下管線、輸電鐵塔與震後火災之災損推估模式研究。台北：國家地震工程研究中心。 4.莊敏賢、何國謙、林俐玲。2006。高壓電塔塔基安全評估之研究.坡地防災學報 5(2): 1-14。 5.許志義、陳春生、曾聖文、何心怡、孫世琬、魏趨安、周忠信。2000。從「七二九」與「九二一」停電事件分析我國電力系統之安全政策。台北：行政院研究發展考核委員會。 6.劉季宇、汪以仁、劉志文。2008。電力系統震害風險分析與減災策略工具之研究。台北：國家地震工程研究中心。 7.輸配電工程處。1979。輸電工程作業手冊。台北：台灣電力公司。 8.羅俊雄、黃奇瑜、溫國樑、林美聆、蕭江碧、張國鎮、施邦築、許銘熙、林其璋、王鴻楷、簡文郁、柴駿甫、鄧崇任、葉錦勳、黃炯憲、劉季宇、鄧慰先、張順益、葉勇凱、賴美如、王聖明、鐘立來、廖文義、李政寬、許健智。1999。九二一集集大地震全面勘災精簡報告。台北：國家地震工程研究中心。 9.ATC. 1985. Earthquake Damage Evaluation Data for California, Report ATC-13. Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, California. 10.ATC. 2000. Database on the Performance of Structures Near Strong-Motion Recordings, Report ATC-38. Applied Technology Council, Redwood City, California. 11.Barbat, A. H., Pujades, L. G., Lantada, N. 2008. Seismic Damage Evaluation in Urban Areas Using the Capacity Spectrum Method: Application to Barcelona. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. 28(10): 851–865. 12.Basoz, N. I., Kiremidjian, A. S., King, S. A., Law, K. H. 1999. Statistical Analysis of Bridge Damage Data from the 1994 Northridge, CA, Earthquake. Earthquake Spectra. 15(1): 25-54. 13.Borzi, B., Pinho, R., Crowley, H. 2008. Simplified Pushover-based Vulnerability Analysis for Large-scale Assessment of RC Buildings. Engineering Structures. 30(3): 804–820. 14.Calvi, G. M., Pinho, R., Magenes, G., Bommer, J. J., Restrepo-Velez, L. F., and Crowley, H. 2006. Development of seismic vulnerability assessment methodologies over the past 30 years. ISET journal of Earthquake Technology. 43(3): 75-104. 15.Casciati, F., Faravelli, L., Liu, X.D. 1994. Lessons of Rehabilitation Design Learned from Statistical Analyses of Masonry Seismic-vulnerability Data. Structural Safety. 16(1): 73-89. 16.Cole, S.W., Xu, Y., Burton, P.W. 2008. Seismic Hazard and Risk in Shanghai and Estimation of Expected Building Damage. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. 28(10): 778-794. 17.CSI. 2014. SAP2000. Ver. 17.0. Berkeley, California, USA: Computer and Structure, Inc. 18.Ellingwood, B. R., Celik, O. C., and Kinali, K. 2007. Fragility assessment of building structural systems in Mid-America. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics. 36(13): 1935-1952. 19.FEMA. 2003. HAZUS-MH MR4 technical manual, multi-hazard loss estimation methodology earthquake model. FEMA 366, Washington, DC. 20.Grant, D.N., Bommer, J.J., Pinho, R., Calvi, G.M., Goretti, A., Meroni, F. 2007. A Prioritization Scheme for Seismic Intervention in School Buildings in Italy. Earthquake Spectra. 23(2): 291-314. 21.Griffin, M. J. 2006. Earthquake Performance of Nonstructural Components and Systems Difficulties in Achieving Enhanced Earthquake Performance. Earthquake Engineering Research Institute (EERI), 100th Anniversary Earthquake Conference, San Francisco, California, April 18-22. 22.Jeong, S. H., Mwafy, A. M., Elnashai, A. S. 2012. Probabilistic Seismic Performance Assessment of Code-compliant Multi-story RC Buildings. Engineering Structures. 34: 527–537. 23.Kappos, A. J., Panagopoulos, G. 2010. Fragility Curves for Reinforced Concrete Buildings in Greece. Structure and Infrastructure Engineering. 6(1-2):39-53. 24.Kappos, A. J., Panagopoulos, G., Panagiotopoulos, C., Penelis, Gr. 2006. A Hybrid Method for the Vulnerability Assessment of R/C and URM Buildings. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering. 4(4): 391-413. 25.Karim, K. R., Yamazaki, F. 2001. Effect of Earthquake Ground Motions on Fragility Curves of Highway Bridge Piers Based on Numerical Simulation. Earthquake Engineering and Structure Dynamics. 30(12): 1839–1856. 26.Karim, K. R., Yamazaki, F. 2003. A Simplified Method of Constructing Fragility Curves for Highway Bridges. Earthquake Engineering and Structure Dynamics. 32(10): 1603-1626. 27.Kircher, C. A., Nassar, A. A., Kustu, O., and Holmes, W. T. 1997. Development of building damage functions for earthquake loss estimation. Earthquake spectra. 13(4): 663-682. 28.Lee, C. L., Su, R. K. L. 2012. Fragility Analysis of Low-rise Masonry in-filled Reinforced Concrete Buildings by a Coefficient-based Spectral Acceleration Method. Earthquake Engineering Structural Dynamics. 41(4): 697-713 29.Li H. N., W. L. Shi, G. X. Wang, and L. G. Jia. 2005. Simplified models and experimental verification for coupled transmission tower-line system to seismic excitations. Journal of Sound and Vibration. 286(3): 569-585. 30.Liao, W. I., Loh, C. H., Tsai, K. C. 2006. Study on the Fragility of Building Structures in Taiwan. Natural Hazards. 37(1-2): 55-69. 31.Munoz, A., Blondet, M., Aguilar, R., and Astorga, M. A. 2007. Empirical fragility curves for peruvian school buildings. Earthq Resis Eng Struct VI. 93: 269-277. 32.Park, J., Towashiraporn, P., Craig, J. I., Goodnod, B. J. 2009. Seismic Fragility An 33.Penelis, Gr. G., Kappos, A. J., Stylianidis, K. C. 2003. Assessment of the Seismic Vulnerability of Unreinforced Masonry Bbuildings. Paper Presented at 8th International Conference on Structural Studies: Repairs and Maintenance of Heritage Architecture, Chalkidiki, Greece.WIT Press, Southampton, UK 34.Reese, S., Bradley, B. A., Bind, J., Smart, G., Power, W., Sturman, J. 2011. Empirical Building Fragilities from Observed Damage in the 2009 South Pacific Tsunami. Earth-Science Reviews. 107(1-2): 156-173. 35.Rossetto, T., Elnashai, A. 2003. Derivation of Vulnerability Functions for European-type RC Structures Based on Observational Data. Engineering Structures. 25(10): 1241- 1263. 36.Rota, M., Penna, A., Strobbia, C. L. 2008. Processing Italian Damage Data to Derive Typological Fragility Curves. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering. 28(10): 933-947. 37.Shinozuka, M., Feng, M. Q., Kim, H. K., Kim, S. H. 2000a. Nonlinear Static Procedure for Fragility Curve Development. Journal of Engineering Mechanics. 126(12): 1287-1295. 38.Shinozuka, M., Feng, M. Q., Lee, J., Naganuma, T. 2000b. Statistical Analysis of Fragility Curves. Journal of Engineering Mechanics. 126(12): 1224-1231. 39.Taiwan Power Company. 2003. Taiwan Power Company Sustainability Report 2013. Available at: http://www.Taipower.com.tw/UpFile/CompanyENFile/2013Taipower_English_EBook.pdf. Accessed 23 April 2016. 40.Tian L., H. N. Li and G. H. Liu. 2012. Seismic response of power transmission tower-line system under multi-component multi-support excitations. J. Earthq. Tsunami. 6(4): 21 pages. 41.Tien, Y. M., Juang, C. H., Chen, J. M., Pai, C. H. 2012. Isointensity-isoexposure Concept for Seismic Vulnerability Analysis-A Case Study of the 1999 Chi-Chi. Taiwan Earthquake. Engineering Geology. 131: 1-10. 42.Whitman, R. V., Anagnos, T., Kircher, C. A., Lagorio, H. J., Lawson, R. S., and Schneider, P. 1997. Development of a national earthquake loss estimation methodology. Earthquake Spectra. 13(4): 643-661. 43.Yamazaki, F., Murao, O. 2000. Vulnerability Functions for Japanese Buildings Based on Damage Data Due to the 1995 Kobe Earthquake. Implications of Recent Earthquakes on Seismic Risk. 2: 91-102. 44.Yin T., H.F. Lam, H.M. Chow, H.P. Zhu. 2009. Dynamic reduction-based structural damage detection of transmission tower utilizing ambient vibration data. Eng. Struct. 31(9): 2009-2019. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/18913 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 1999年9月21日淩晨1時47分12.6秒臺灣發生歷史上規模最大的一場災害性地震—集集大地震，此次地震造成大規模的電力系統損壞，台電中部山區各電廠、變電所、輸電鐵塔、配電線路等處多有損壞。在地震發生當時，台灣電力公司已經建置3,741座345 kV超高壓輸電塔，而其中就有307座超高壓輸電塔在此次地震中受損。由此可見，地震對於超高壓輸電鐵塔的危害不容小覷，尤其臺灣位處於地震頻繁的地區，地震對於超高壓輸電鐵塔具有更高的威脅性，所以有必要就地震對輸電塔的影響作更深入的了解與探討。
因此本研究針對超高壓輸電塔建立一套量化的地震損害風險評估模型，本研究使用有限元分析軟體SAP2000建立電塔模型。為了評估塔的損傷程度，本研究以非線性動力分析建立電塔的易損性曲線，易損性曲線可以描述電塔在特定地震發生後不同損壞程發生的機率。本研究提出的地震損害風險評估模型，可以使得在地震發生後能更加準確掌握輸電系統的損害狀況，加速緊急救難作業的進行；或於地震發生前，根據本研究提供之可靠評估的數據，作為災害發生前的風險管理之運用。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | The Chi-Chi earthquake is one of the biggest earthquake occurred on September 21, 1999 in Taiwan and caused a huge damage to the power system. There were 3,741 EHV towers at that time, and a total of 307 EHV transmission towers were damaged by the earthquake. Therefore, seismic hazards for EHV transmission towers should not be underestimated. In particular, earthquakes are a significant threat to EHV transmission towers especially in Taiwan. Thus, this study establishes a quantitative risk assessment model for the seismic hazard analysis on the EHV transmission tower structure. The real form of tower model was built in finite element analysis software SAP2000. In order to assess the damage level of towers, the fragility curves of towers were established by nonlinear dynamic analysis. The fragility curves can describe the probability of structures at different damage levels caused by the earthquakes. The damage level of an EHV tower after an earthquake can be accurately estimated by the proposed model, and emergency repair operations can be arranged. In addition, before an earthquake occurs, the proposed model can be used as a tool for estimate the damage potential of EHV towers. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-08T01:39:17Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-105-R03631010-1.pdf: 2870396 bytes, checksum: f155eb188442acd650a253af2a9ee8e4 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 口試委員會審定書 i
誌謝 ii 中文摘要 iii Abstract iv Table of Contents v List of Illustrations vii List of Tables ix Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1. Background 1 1.2. Motivation and Purpose 4 1.3. Thesis Organization 5 Chapter 2 Literature Review 7 2.1. Introduction of a Power System 7 2.1.1. EHV Transmission Tower Structure 8 2.1.2. Types of transmission towers 10 2.1.3. The Suspension Tower 10 2.1.4. The Tension Tower 11 2.1.5. Types of Foundations of Transmission Towers 12 2.1.6. The General Foundation 12 2.1.7. The Spread Foundation 12 2.1.8. The Mat Foundation 13 2.1.9. The Caisson Foundation 14 2.1.10. The Monopile Foundation 14 2.1.11. The Pile Foundation 15 2.1.12. The Deep Foundation 15 2.2. Seismic Risk Assessment 15 2.2.1. Earthquake Risk Assessment Model 16 2.2.2. The Fragility Curve 20 Chapter 3 Research Methods 26 3.1. EHV Transmission Tower Structural Modelling 28 3.1.1 The EHV Transmission Tower Model Construction 29 3.1.2 Tower Static Load 32 3.2. Modal Analysis 34 3.3. Nonlinear Time History Analysis 36 3.4. Seismic Fragility Curves 38 Chapter 4 Result 43 4.1. Modal Analysis Result 43 4.2. Story drift ratio 44 4.3. PGA Response Spectrum 46 4.4. Fragility Curve 48 Chapter 5 Conclusions 50 References 51 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | |
| dc.title | 應用於超高壓輸電網之地震損害風險評估模型設計 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Design of a Seismic Hazard Risk Assessment Model for EHV Transmission Grid | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 104-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 蕭瑛東,俞齊山,吳立成 | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 智慧電網,輸電鐵塔,地震損害風險評估模型,非線性動力分析法,易損性曲線, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | smart grid,transmission tower,seismic hazard risk assessment,nonlinear dynamic analysis,fragility curve, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 55 | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201603379 | |
| dc.rights.note | 未授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2016-08-22 | |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 生物資源暨農學院 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 生物產業機電工程學研究所 | zh_TW |
| 顯示於系所單位： | 生物機電工程學系 | |
文件中的檔案：
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-105-1.pdf 未授權公開取用 | 2.8 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件，除了特別指名其著作權條款之外，均受到著作權保護，並且保留所有的權利。