## 4 Simulation Conditions
### Combined Wind, Snow, and Seismic Conditions
#### 4.2.2 Analysis and Optimization Suggestions  
Based on the data from Table 9, graphs depicting the total deformation and stress variations for the three different thicknesses in various directions are plotted in Figure 23. Here, the horizontal axis represents the direction of seismic waves, the vertical axis on the left graph represents the maximum deformation, and the one on the right graph represents the maximum stress. Each line represents a different side wall thickness, distinguished by different colors, with blue indicating 2.5 mm, green indicating 2 mm, and red indicating 1.5 mm for the box-type substation. Figure 24 illustrates the total deformation and stress variation for the three thicknesses in the X+Y+Z direction. Combining Figures 23 and 24, the following conclusions can be drawn: (1) Deformation Analysis: The 2.5 mm wall thickness shows the largest deformation in the X direction and the XZ combination direction. The deformation of the 2.0 mm wall thickness in the Y direction and the ZY combination direction is slightly less than that of 2.5 mm, but in the X+Y+Z combination direction. The largest deformation is \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Thicknesses** & **Response** & **X** & **Y** & **Z** & **XZ** & **ZY** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{2.5 mm} & Von Mises Stress (MPa) & 0.74187 & 0.0058215 & 0.034293 & 0.74187 & 0.034783 \\  & Total Deformation (mm) & 0.20956 & 0.0013857 & 0.0081451 & 0.20958 & 0.0082622 \\  & Von Mises Stress (MPa) & 0.74192 & 0.0036284 & 0.066942 & 0.74192 & 0.06704 \\  & Total Deformation (mm) & 0.23642 & 0.0012021 & 0.0090749 & 0.23642 & 0.0091109 \\  & Von Mises Stress (MPa) & 0.77286 & 0.0061081 & 0.054647 & 0.77286 & 0.054655 \\  & Total Deformation (mm) & 0.06401 & 0.001135 & 0.0046594 & 0.064027 & 0.0046597 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 9: The combined simulation results for the three thicknesses. Figure 23: The total deformation and stress variation for the three different thicknesses under different directions of seismic waves. Figure 22: ZY-direction stress and deformation of box-type substation under combined operating conditions. 0.23642 mm. In contrast, the total deformation of the 1.5 mm wall thickness in all directions remains at a relatively low level, especially in the X+Y+Z combined direction, where its deformation is much lower than the other two thicknesses, which reflects that a thinner wall thickness is superior in maintaining the shape of the structure. Even under the multi-directional action of seismic waves, the 1.5 mm thick structure can better maintain its original shape and reduce damage caused by deformation. (2) Stress Analysis: The stresses in the Y direction and ZY combined direction for the three wall thicknesses are significantly higher than in the other directions, which indicates that the material is more sensitive to seismic waves in these directions. According to the data in Table 9, we observe that the stress values and deformations of the 1.5 mm wall thickness in all single and combined directions are relatively uniform. Although its stress in the YZ combined direction is slightly higher (0.77286 MPa), this difference is very small. Small and without extreme peaks, its response to seismic waves is relatively uniform, and this also indicates that a thinner wall thickness can provide a sufficient anti-deformation performance, without sacrificing too much strength. Through an in-depth analysis of the simulation results for the three different thickness schemes, it is realized that selecting an appropriate thickness is crucial for optimizing the structural integrity of the box-type substation, while ensuring safety and durability. The 2.5 mm wall thickness may be more suitable for bearing loads in a single direction, but under the combined action of multiple directions, its stability is not as good as the 1.5 mm wall thickness.