Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Sgem 2013
Sgem 2013
ABSTRACT
Elevated reservoirs are used to store a variety of liquids. During earthquake activity the
liquid exerts impulsive and convective pressures (sloshing) on the walls and bottom of
tank. This paper provides theoretical background for analytical calculating of elevated
tanks during an earthquake and deals with comparing of simplified seismic design
procedures for elevated tanks, and the applicability for subsoil classes. The analysis has
been carried out considering four different subsoil classes A, B, C, D, given EC8. The
design by simplified seismic procedures given EC8 and Housner model was compared.
Keywords: elevated tank, simplified procedures, seismic, impulse mass, convective
mass
INTRODUCTION
Seismic event is certainly one of the most critical external events regarding safety of
industrial plants, as demonstrated by recent earthquakes. If industrial facilities store
large amount of hazardous materials, accidental scenarios as fire, explosion or toxic
dispersion may be triggered, thus possibly involving working people within the
installation, population living in close surrounding or in urban area where the industrial
installation is located. Liquid storage tanks are considered essential lifeline structures.
Large-capacity ground-supported tanks are used to store a variety of liquids, e.g. water
for drinking and fire fighting, petroleum, chemicals, and liquefied natural gas.
Elevated tanks are used in military bases, industrial facilities, and nuclear reactor
illustrations. These structures consist of two main parts: a tower and vessel. The former
can be a steel braced frame, a multi-column assembly, or an axisymmetric pedestal
shell. The vessel comes in a variety of geometric shapes such as cylinders, spheres,
cones, ellipsoid, or a combination of any of these geometric shapes. Elevated tanks are
vulnerable to earthquake excitation mainly because of the relatively small resistance
that the supporting system can offer during seismic events. Most elevated tanks are
regarded as essential facilities as they should remain functional even after a major
earthquake. The seismic analysis and design of liquid storage tanks are complicated by
many numbers of problems, for examples: dynamic interaction between contained fluid
and vessel which is called fluid-structure interaction; sloshing motion of the contained
fluid; and dynamic interaction between vessel and supporting structure. In addition, the
supporting tower may need to be analyzed in post-elastic state, and for special cases, a
three-dimensional analysis may be required to take into account torsional effect on the
supporting structure. The many different geometric shapes of both vessel and tower
dictate different techniques and methods of analysis for each application, and finally,
soil-tower interaction could under specific conditions have a significant effect on
seismic response of the tower.
Satisfactory performance of tanks during strong ground shaking is crucial for modern
facilities. Tanks that were inadequately designed or detailed have suffered extensive
damage during past earthquakes [2 8]. Knowledge of pressures and forces acting on
the walls and bottom of containers during an earthquake and frequency properties of
containers is important for good analysis and design of earthquake resistant
structures/facilities tanks.
SEISMIC DESIGN OF LIQUID STORAGE TANKS
Seismic design of liquid storage tanks has been adopted in [4, 8, 10]. When a tank
containing liquid vibrates, the liquid exerts impulsive and convective hydrodynamic
pressure on the tank wall and the tank base, in addition to the hydrostatic pressure. The
dynamic analysis of a liquid filled tank may be carried out using the concept of
generalized single degree of freedom (SDOF) systems representing the impulsive
and convective modes of vibration of the tank liquid system. For practical
applications, only the first convective mode of vibration needs to be considered in the
analysis (Fig. 1). The impulsive mass of liquid mi is rigidly attached to tank wall at
height hi (or hi' ). Similarly convective mass mc is attached to the tank wall at height hc
(or hc' ) by a spring of stiffness kc. The mass, height and natural period of each SDOF
system are obtained by the methods described in [4, 8, 10]. For a horizontal earthquake
ground motion, the response of various SDOF systems may be calculated independently
and then combined to give the net base shear and overturning moment. The most tanks
have slimness of tank , whereby 0,3 < < 3. Tanks slimness is given by relation
= H/R, where H is the height of filling of fluid in the tank and R the tank radius [6 10].
=
kc/2
mc
kc/2
H
z
x
mi
hc
hi
'
( hc ) ( hi' )
z
x
Fig. 1. Two single degree of freedom systems for ground supported cylindrical tank
Housner
(1a)
= H 2R
(1b)
(7) - (15).
V = Vi 2 + Vc2
(2a)
V = Vi + V c .
(2b)
(3b)
(3a)
Tc = Cc R
C c From Tab. 1.
Tc = Cc D g
(4a)
(4b)
C c = 2 / 3,68 tanh(3,68 H D ) (5)
The natural period of the impulsive mode of vibration Ti in second for elevated tank is
given by [10]
Ti = 2 (mi + m s ) K s
(6)
where m s is mass of container and one-third mass of standing, K s is lateral stiffness of
standing.
Table 1 Recommended design values for first impulsive and convective modes of
vibration as a function of a tank height-to-ratio (h/R) [9]
H /R
Ci
Cc
mi / m
mc / m
hi / H
hc / H
hi' / H
hc' / H
0.3
9.28
2.09
0.176
0.824
0.400
0.521
2.640
3.414
0.5
7.74
1.74
0.300
0.700
0.400
0.543
1.460
1.517
0.7
6.97
1.60
0.414
0.586
0.404
0.571
1.009
1.011
1.0
6.36
1.52
0.548
0.452
0.419
0.616
0.721
0.785
1.5
6.06
1.48
0.686
0.314
0.439
0.690
0.555
0.734
2.0
6.21
1.48
0.763
0.237
0.448
0.751
0.500
0.764
2.5
6.56
1.48
0.810
0.190
0.452
0.794
0.480
0.796
3.0
7.03
1.48
0.842
0.158
0.453
0.825
0.472
0.825
1
0,8
0,6
0,4
0,2
0
m c /m
3
2
1
0
'
h i /H
3
2
h c ' /H
1
0
H/R3 0
H/R3 0
H/R3
0
1
2
1
2
1
2
Figure 2: Impulsive and convective masses as fractions of the total liquid mass in the
cylindrical tank, impulsive heights as fraction of the height of the liquid in the cylindrical
tank, convective heights as fraction of the height of the liquid in the cylindrical tank
mi tanh(0.866 D H )
=
m
0.866 D H
m
tanh(3.68 H D )
c = 0,23
m
H D
h
i = 0.375 , pre H D 1.5
H
(7)
(8)
(9)
hc
cosh (3.68 H D ) 1.0
= 1
(10)
H
3.68 H L sinh (3.68 H D )
0.09375
= 0.5
, pre H D >1.5(11)
H D
hi'
0.866 D H
=
0.125 , pre D L 1.33
H 2 tanh (0.866 D H )
= 0.45 ,pre D L >1.33
'
hc
cosh (3.68 H D ) 2.01
= 1
H
3.68 H D sinh (3.68 L D )
mg
k c = 0.836
tanh 2 (3.68 H D )
H
g
2 = 3.68 tanh (3.68 H D )
D
(12)
(13)
(14)
(15)
(16)
hi' = 3.17 m, hc' = 3.45 m. Time period of impulsive mode of empty elevated tank is
Ti = 0.66 s.
2500
2083 2096
2000
1671 1678
1477 1476
1500
500
V [kN]
model 1
987 989
905 903
1000
1785 1785
model 2
model 3
model 4
Figure 5: Total base shear V [kN] immediately bellow the base plate in dependency on
category of sub-soil
Table 2 Total base shear at the bottom of staging tank on four different subsoil classes
A, B, C, D
V [kN] model 3r
V [kN] model 4
% Deviation of V [kN]
V [kN] empty tank
495.69
496.20
0.10
356.57
986.50
988.91
0.24
686.39
1671.35
1478.34
0.42
734.33
2083.04
2096.32
0.64
881.19
30000
25000
19459
17772
19506
17888
20000
15000
10000
9267
9204
9802
18282
18204
22007
21942
24498
24295
M' [kNm]
18953
18951
model 1
9762
model 2
model 3
5000
model 4
Figure 6: Total overturning moment M ' [kNm] immediately bellow the base plate in
dependency on category of sub-soil
Table 3 Total overturning moment at base of staging on four different subsoil classes A,
B, C, D
M [kNm] model 3
M [kNm] model 4
% Deviation of M [kNm]
M [kNm] empty tank
9802.57
9762.41
-0.41
6823.28
19506.09
19458.63
-0.24
13164.98
21842.12
22007.26
0.30
14084.43
24295.23
24498.09
0.84
16901.31
CONCLUSION
The seismic design of elevated tanks was using single lumped-mass models provides
smaller base shears and overturning moments in both fixed-base and flexible soil
conditions. It is evident from the Figures 5 and 6, that the values of total base shears an
overturning moments are grooved with category of subsoil. It is seen, that using SRSS
rule for calculating of total base shear at the bottom of staging tank and total
overturning moment at base of staging are obtained smaller value as by combining of
impulsive and convective modes through absolute summation rule recommended by
EC8. Diferences between two-mass model suggested by Housner and model based on
the work of Velestos and co-workers [Malhotra], simple procedure, which are suggested
in the EC8 for seismic design of elevated tanks, are seen from Table 2 and Table 3.
Calculating of total base shear at the bottom of staging tank and total overturning
moment at base of staging are seen from Figure 5 and Figure 6.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Preparation of the paper has been supported by the Scientific Grant Agency of the
Ministry of Education of Slovak Republic and the Slovak Academy of Sciences under
Project 1/0201/11 and by the Centre Progressive Constructions and Technologies in
Transportation Engineering. The Centre was supported by the Slovak Research and
Development Agency under the contract No. SUSPP-0013-09 and the companies
Ininierske stavby and EUROVIA SK.
REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
Mel-Rakabawy, M., M., El-Arabaty, H., A., El-Sherbiny, M., G.: Response of
elevated water tanks yo seismic load. In: 11th ICSGE, 17.-19. May 2005, Cairo Egypt.
[3]
Juhsov, E., Benat, J., Kritofovi, V., Kolcn, ., 2002: Expected seismic response of
steel water tank, In: 12th European Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Paper
reference 595, London 2002.
[4]
Krlik, J.: Dynamic analysis of soil-fluid-tsmk interaction due to earthquake even. In:
Dynamic of ridig and deformable bodies 2012: st nad Labem. Univerzita J. E. Purkyn
v st n. L.: Univerzita J. E. Purkyn v st n. L., ISBN 978-80-7414-500-0.
[5]
Livaolu, R., Doangn, A.: Simplified seismic analysis procedures for elevated
tanks considering fluid-soil interaction. In: Journal of fluid and structures 22,
2006. p. 421-439.
[6]
Malhotra, P. K., Wenk, T., Wieland, M.: Simple procedure for seismic analysis of
liquid-storage tanks, Structural Engineering International, No. 3, 2000, s. 197-201.
[7]
Melcer, J., Lajkov, G.: Dynamick vpotov model asfaltovej vozovky In:
Stavebn a environmentlne ininierstvo Ro. 7, . 1 (2011), s. 2-12 ISSN: 13365835.
[8]
Jaiswal, O., R., Rai, D. C., Jain, S., K.: Review of code provisions on design seismic
forces for liquid storage tanks. Kanpur, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, 2005
[9]
[10] IITK-GSDMA, 2005: Guidelines for seismic design of liquid storage tanks provisions
with commentary and explanatory examples. Kanpur, Indian Institute of Technology
Kanpur, 2005