e ( eo > : . : TABLE OF CONTENTS 5 \ 5 Abstract .- a Table of Contents ‘ Acknowledgements - Nomenclature . 1.0. Introduction . 2.0. Scope . : 3.0 Design of Tank Side Waliis Without stiffeners 4:0 Design of Tank Side Walls With Top-edge stiffeners 5.0 Design of Tank Side Walls With Horizontal stiffeners 6.0 Design of Tank Side Walls With Vertical Stiffenets 7.0 Design of Tank Botton Plates and Roof Plates 8.0. Summary of the Overal1 Design Concepts 9.0° A Design Report to {Ilustrate the Design Method (Numerical Examples) ; 10,0 Conclusions. 11.0 References 12.0 Appendix | ~ Numerical Graphs 7 : 38 iAl . ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS f \ The author has obtained such knowledge as he possesses from contact with the work of a large nuiber of people. He owes a very large debt, of gratitude tochis former colleagues of Canadian Vickers Limited and Velan Engineering Company, for their technical assistance” and spiritual encouragement. He also likes to take this opportunity to thank Prof. A.E. Blach, who has assisted him in various ways in the Preparation of the manuscript ‘and has made many valuable suggestions. The author will welcome any criticism regarding any part of the manuscript. Only from Such criticism can technology be improved.NOMENCLATURE .°, . a Dimensionless numerical factor (See popeng!x y 8 Dimensionless numerical’ factor (See Appendix 1) ¥ Density of the content, Ib/in? (kg/m?) o Stress, psi (MPa) : Cpa Maximum stress, psi (MPa) a A >’ d 4, ma) o E h ' i Fe 4 M Pp x Ry ae s Width of tank, in (m) Urdss-sectional area, in? (n?) Length of tank, in (im) - Deflection, in (nm) x aximum deflection, in (nm Depth, in (m) 2 Modulus of elasticity, psi (HPa) , (mn) Honent of inertia, in’ (ni!) « Height of tank, i Required moment of inertia, int (m*) Length, In (n) Bending moment, Ib=IN (N-m) Inax Maximum bending moment, 1b-1N (N=m) Pressifte, ps! (KPa) Bottom edge reaction, 1b/1N (N/m) Intermediate horizontal stiffener reaction, Ib/IN (N/m) Top edge reaction, 1b/IN (Wn). Allowable stress, psi (MPa) Hinimum yield strength, ps! (MPa)* : : \ i a , . . i t Plate thickness, In (rm) = : 7 Actual plate thickness to be used, in (on) : t, Required plate thickness, In (om) oo a - : W Unit load, 1b/IN (N/m) x Length of rectangular plate, in (m) : ~ oo | y. Width of rectangular plate, in (mn). - . ee Z Section modulus; In? (a?) an 7 "I y9q Resulred section modulus,’ tn? (nw) . | ! wo | 7 i } t a ho _ . / E | : : { . . . : | ! i - too | t F ; 7 : [vow - f ' | ~ : . ° aT q1.0 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this analysis is to describe a simple method for the design of a rectangular non-pressurized storage tani which will weet all the design requirements stated in the following paragraphs. Tanks are usually designed and fabricated according to the minimum requirements of certain specifications or codes. The current API Codes do not have any specific requirenents for rectangular storage tank design or fabrication. Recently, the ASHE Boiler and Pressure Vessel “code, Sectin VIII Division 4, 1979 Sumer Addenda issued 2 new set of mandatory rules (Appendix XIII) for the design of rectangular and obround vessels. They may be used for reference. Rectangular storage tanks bre usually designed in accordance with the following criteria:~ i) Rectangular in shape ii) For nonpressurized storage ° 1 Tif) Tank wall is subject to hydrostatic head only (i.e. uniformly increasing load from top to bottom and normal to its plane) iv) No external pressure 7. v) Design temperature:- from room temperature up to 200°F vi) Corrosion allowance to be included in the design, If required.In the following chapters, the basic design formulae for thin plates under bending and menbrane tension, also the effect of structural stiffeners and the stress analysis in some cases are discussed. The most | common tank wall configurations, unstiffened and stiffened are analysed and { their applications are illustrated In.a numerical example « | / { i a _« ‘ 6 eG : : x ’ ’ 2 Z : 72 vf . F ‘i | | | I 2.0 SCOPE ’ ~ The design of rectangular storage tanks is based on the stress analysis! of flat rectangular plates under different cases of loading and edge conditions. : The bending properties of a flat plate depend largely on its thickness as compared to its other dimensions. Plate theory usually . fi distinguishes three different categories: 1) Thin plates with small deflection Thin plates with large deflections : Thick plates. 21 Plates With Small Deflections If the deflection of a plate is small in comparison with its “thickness, a very satisfactory approximate theory of bending of the pate by lateral loads can be developed by making the following assumption: ‘ 1) There is no deformation in the middle plane of the plate. This - is often called the neutral plane. eet p ) Points “Of the plate lying initially in a normal-to-the-middle *: plane of the plate renain on the normal-to-the-niddle plane of " the plate after bending. The effect of sheer forces on the deflection of the thin plates Is considered negligible. ‘ TIT} The normal stress in the direction transverse to the plate can be disregarded. . . :| | | BG : . . ALL stress components can be expressed by the deflection of the © Plate, which is a function of the two coordinates in the plase-of the r plate. This function can be expressed as a linear partial differential equation. For a given set of boundary conditions, the stresses at any . point of the plate can be calculated. . For rectangular plate analysts, - “these equations are very well explained if many plate theory books [8], 22 Thin Plate With Large Deflection ~ When the deflection becomes larger than about one-half the thickness, there is strain in the middle plane. The stress in this middle plane cannot be ignored. This. stress, called diaphragm stress or direct stress, enables the plate, to carry part of the load as a diaphragm in dhrect tension. This tension may be bakanced by radial tension at the'edges UF the edges are held or by elreunferential compression If ihe edges are not ied. i horizontally restré . : Membrane stresses would also arise in such a plate if its edges “are immovable in its plane and the deflections are sufficiently large: : If all these-are taken into consideration in deriving the differential equation, a nonlinear load-deflection and load~stress * + relation. is obtained, However, for rectangular plates under uniform : * load produ 19 large deflections, analytical solutions which relate load, deflection and stress in terms of numerical values of the dimensionless coefficients: d/e, pb'Zet" and ob”/t” can be obtaitied fron [5].2.3. Thick Plates . . qiisk Plates The approximate theories of thin plates becomes unreliable in the case of plates of considerable thickhess, especially in the case.of ot " highly concentrated loads. In such a case, the thick-plate theory should + be applied. This theory cousiders the problem of plates as a three- dimensional problen of elasticity. 2. Thin Plate Theory For Rectangular Tank Design of small deflect n-thin-plate theory. All these solutions of numerical analysis are obtained from [5], (61, (7] and [8] . “and can beaccepted as sufficiently accurate so long as the following assumptions hold true: + 1) _ The plate 1s flat, of uniform thickness and of homogeneous . | ON cisotegpic material; 7 : ii) The plate thickness is not more than about one-quarter of \ the lesgt transverse dimension: 111) The maximum deflection is not more than about one-half of the 7 so plate thickness. : Iv) The loadings are nornal to the plane of the plate. “| , v) The plate is nowhere stressed beyond the elastic limit 7 (ise. Theory of linear elasticity is appliéd). : Beate 7 :3.0 DESIGN OF TANK SIDE WALLS WITHOUT STIFFENERS . ‘ The tink wall Ts subjected to an uniformly increasing load _ which varies’from top to bottom edge. This internal pressure is due . to the weight of the contents. The hydrostatic pressure can be expressed as:+ (See Figure 1) ig P = maximum hydrostatic pressure =m + . ( where ' . h = the maximum height of the contents, height of the tank or height to overflow nozz}e | y= density of the contents _ ; \ . For conservative design, it i's simply to analyse only the longest side wall, having the greatest span between supports. Tanks without F 7 dtiffeners will have their top edge free and the remaining three edges simply supported. A typical tank wall is Illustrated in Figure 2. The maximum bending stress and deflection on the #a11 can be determined by ' applying flat plate formulas with the above, lading and edge conditions. . ‘ These maximun stress and deflection are given.by : ; : , Gayy = maximum bending stress in the plate’ aan = ppb?/e? ° (2) ggy, 7 faxiun deflection of the plate ; . : = opb'e3 () oeFixed Support, ‘Support, Supported Figure 2. Wall Panel Without Stiffeners -B- °where 2 . : . a = dimensionless numerical fattor depending on the ratio obtained from Graph #1 8 = dimensionless numerical factor, see Graph #1 . t = plate thickness a E = modulus of elasticity . - ! - . By rearranging equation (2), the required wall thickness is:- t, * minimum required walh thickness ‘ soy— co 7 ) : 0 where ! : a Corrosion allowance should be considered in deriving the actual Plate thickness t,. However, in no case will the minimum required . wall thickness be less than 3/16 inch for all carbon steel tanks as i econmended by API codes. Generally, stainless steel tanks may be | designed with less than 3/16 inch thick wall panel. ! ” The actual plate thickness t, (less corrosion allowaqce) can be & e . + employed in equation (3) to determine the maximun deflection. The i maximum deflection should ‘not exceed one half of the required plate thickness. 7 height, hy to the length, b (I.e. h/b). Values can be, aThe available numerical data, as shown on Graph #1 are i limited for values of h/b from 0.5 to 5. For extreme cases, suchas, “very long (h/a.+ 0) and very high (h/b + ©) rectangular tanks which are ' very seldom used, flat plate theory my be.replaced by straight beam | hoy anstysis. at g : _ > 5 . ( } - 2 ‘ e % . . foo von | | ; i | . ‘ . : , ! : co . wt : \ : \ ~ > = . 2 i a oa . a re . ‘ -10= ~at y 4.0 DESIGN OF TANK SIDE WALLS WITH TOP EDGE STIFFENERS oe ° é If the plate thi ied by the previous section kness as determi {seems uneconomical, or the plate deflection is too large and exceeds one 5 i half of its, thickness, a top edge stiffener should be added. } Top edge stiffeners are required for open-top tank. Stiffehers shall be located at the top and preferably on the outside of the tank . shell. In this case, al} edges of the tank wall may be considered to | be'simply supported. The minimum wall thickness and the maximun def lec can be obtained by equations (3) and (4) with appropriate values of a an from Graph #2 for h b. (See Figure 3.) 7 For sizing the top edge stiffeners of snall tanks, straight . 5 beam analysis may be used without taking ‘into account the corner moments | at the top edge frame. . For a top and bottom supported tank wall, the top and bottom edge reactions can be expressed as . top edge reaction per unit length . = PH/6 (6) : R, * bottom edge reaction per unit length : = Ph/3 5 . (6) \ The top edge, stiffener is subjected to the uniformly distributed c load Ry. The maximum deflection of the bean for this load is given by -i2-\ i. Since this’ maximum deflection of the panel is limited to ones : half of the plate thickness, we have t R, ot , 2 = her : (@) . Z * BUT : “By rearranging equation (8), the size of the top edgi stiffeners can be determined fron its minimum required monent of inertia. That is Rebs L etna) : req” T92Et (9) : 7 : : “For an econonical design, a rigid frame with corner imonent connections should be used rather thari simply supported beams. Since the. top edge stiffeners form a closed rectangular frame with moment connections at the corners, the stiffeneys can be analysed as rigid frame. (See Figure 4.) poet w By applying the three-moment-equation, the corner moment and ‘the maximum monent at each span (using a constant monent of inertia for . all sides of the frame) can be obtained as follows corner moment \. . E 7 - % a Ay fe . : Figure 4.. Bending Moment diagram of Top edge - ‘ , stiffeners (Rigid Frane) - iheA, = maximum bending ie ~t-- ao Me My = maxi SMe ? moment on length side of stiffener (12) / Then, the bending stresses at the above locations of the top j stiffeners can be expressed as / : bending stress at corner qa) imum bending imomént on width side of stiffener for the given material. Steel Structures for Buildings is recommended as a guidel 6, = maximum bending.stress ‘at ‘length side of stiffener a z a, = maximum -bending stress at width side of stiffener ‘e \ z (15) ‘ section modulus of stiffener 4 These bending stresses must be less thet! the allowable stress For structural members, CSA Standard S16 - aanoTop-Edge Stiffener Horizontal stiffener Figure 5. Tank With Horlzontal stiffener A ( sos Be5.0 DESIGN OF TANK SIDE WALLS WITH HORIZONTAL STIFFENERS ” the plate thickness can be reduced considerably by adding _terizontal or vertical stiffeners or a combination of both. -The addition of stiffeners will increase the rigidity of the tank wall by _ increasing the moment of inertia of the conbined section. For the design of tank walls with intermediate horizontal stiffeners, there is no simple formila available. For a conservative design, wall panels may be analysed as Seralght beans by considering strips of unit width, of the plate under the hydrostatic load. The First step is to locate the stiffener. The optimip position is located at the point where the moment due to the distributed load above the stiffener is equal to that produced by the load below it. (see Figures 5 and 6.) . oth a yy * fined eid motent due to distributed load above the stiffener - Loe} fom ae) Mp * fixed and moment due to distributed load below the : stiffener 2 2 w= Leo) (oh)? _ (we) (nh a > 120% : 2 oo & PoP? 5 Zen: Bn? = Tn? + 1500 . (18) also, we have net oree en) + x ay Salving equations (18) and (19) for m and n, we find aa \ af . & m=$@v2-1) = 0.61 as 20 ne lu- 2%) , is 3 = 0.39 : : ee | By subspituting the values gfom and n Intdeither equation (16) or-(17), we can obtain the bending moment at the intermediate horizontal stiffener “in terms of P and-h. ' ‘ | - +, = bending moneht at intermediate horizontal stiffener . : oa , Mae My 5 | . wo 7 32 we wa Bt z Z oo . a ¥ e x 4 a we RAB ye Se p es ETHOS : 5 ’ 01509 pr? . . > (20)" e Sy. + To determine the top edge reaction R., the Jntermediate stiffener reaction fi, and the bottom edge reaction Ry, we have, + = 0.03715 Ph 5 . (21) ‘ . : For the Intermediate horizontal stiffener reaction: .' 2 1 9°. 7 fen = bent . + Reh + Ranh = & Phe 2 = hy (5-30?) = Ph 300 = 0.3316 Pho,” (5-3?) 3 “a | | ! : For the bottom edge reaction: — ; agin Liban? + Lie = fonda? + Lata? Ph 3. . Son (gts) &, , 5 = 0.1312 Ph . (23)7 Figure 7. 0.00675°h* 0.0090Ph" 0.01509Ph” 0..859h, + Bending Monent Diagram of Intermediate Hortzontal StIffener-Panel oN =a| | Then, we have to Zeternine the maxinun bending menent of each meet 1” Section above and below the immediate horizontal stiffener. (See Figure ‘- 7.) For the top section, 0 < kh < mh “we eles . 4 Rykh ePnk or \ keh v5 i : a. = 0.2726 1 : “ Hence, the maximum bending moment at the top section Is: Phén 10'¥5 2nd 30 v5 4 ‘max Phen? . 15 45 “= 0.00675 ph? + : (2a) 2 oe _ 2 -22-‘ } For the bottom section, mk < kh < h e ® WR, kh Ry eae . 1 2). Prem = Ty Phentk + Pak (5-30 Son (5°30! i) - 3 ’ : gens aH 1 ppta? 4 Phe (5-3n2) = Lente? tee oon im z For maximum bending moment, we have . t dM - geo or 7 . 2 1 pp2a? Ph 2) - 1 pr2y2 To Pm? + ER Guinan?) 3 Pe’ k= 0.859 ; u Hence, the maximum bending moment at the lower section ist Max 7 00090 Ph? (25) “Finally, we can determine the required wall thickness. By equation (20), we have jn = bending stress at intermediate horizontal stiffener 2 = 6 m/e, . . = 0.09054 Ph?/e,2 2 (26) ~ f. oeHence, by rearranging equatién (26), the required tank wall thickness Is : t, = required tank wall thickness = 0.301°h ¥P7S Qn The sizes of the top edge and the intermediate horizontal stiffeners can be approximately determined by applying equation (9) with corresponding values of R, and R, respectively. For tanks with more than one intermediate horizontal stiffener, 2 similar approach of analysis as described above can be used. However, in determining the required wall thickness by equations (26) and (27), only { the maximum value of the bending monents of all the intermediate horizontal stiffeners should be used. +6.0 DESIGN OF JANK SIDE WALLS WITH VERTICAL STIFFENERS \« 7 If the plate thickness required for unstiffened tanks Is " unreafistically high, then vertical stiffeners and sonetimes’a combination } of hokizontal and vertical stiffeners may be used. . . In this case, the design procedure Is broken down irto several steps: : . a) To determine the maximum stiffener spacing for a desired plate’ thickness. } b) ~ To establish stiffener layout and spacing. : c) To determine size of vertical stiffener from panel loads. 4) To determine size of top and botton support beans. . ” og I i For the first step, the panel is considered in. the form of multiple ribs. By applying straight beam analysis with both ends : fixed and under an uniformly distributed load, the maximum monent cay - be expressed as : Mag 7 maximum bending monént na Ae = PI/IZ ae 1 and ce . . : © = bending stress : ad g oa . , ee 7 t : : a eles ’ 2 ’ as } ~25- i. Hence, the maximum stiffener spacing for a desired plate 7 thickness is is 1 = maxiium stiffener spacing for plate thickness t : 7 . -ye (28) ° If it Is desired to limit the plate deflection to one half off ‘tp thickness, a similar expression can be obtained i Snax 7 Maximum deflection 7° SONET te enz , i ' Hence, we have : a we 7 2 me Se For d,,, 7 t/2 we have o . | G ' ' 1 = 2 YEP . For tanks of low to intermediate helght, usually equation (28) : : forced tanks with vertical stiffeners only, the deflection expression, equation , eae (29), may limit the stiffener spacing. ' : in conjunction with maximum allowable stress applies. For high, Fe jo . ~~ a . :th Vertical Stiffeners ré 8, Wall Panel Wi FiguiThe addition of vertical stiffeners In accordance with the” stiffener spacing as determined above, divides the wall panel into smaller sections. Each section of the wall panel can i considered as a plate under a uniformly increasing load with the two vertical: edges ‘xed and the horizontal edges sinply supported. For this loading condition, no convenient numerical date are available. Therefore, the case of top edge simply supported and other edges fixed is usually substituted: The maximum bending stress which should not exceed the allowable stress can be expressed a: Spay, 7 Maximum bending stress Once the plate thickness and the stiffener spacing are determined, the stiffeners may be analysed as simple tele loaded by @ t uniformly Increasing load. The maximum moment is given by (See Figure Maax “maximum bending moment — , = 0.0641 Pin? i \ ‘ 8) (30) bo at Hence, the required section modulus of the vertical stiffener is Ty_q 7 Feauired section modulus \ P Hnax 3 se + = 0:0641PIh2/s, ' eaeChannel 1 Beam : e f Contribution of plate is:small and can be neglected Tingle Tee Contribution of plate may be included. 92 | |The selected vertical stiffeners should have @ section modulus equal to-or greater than Z,,q+ For rolled sections such as channels or { beams, the contributions of the plate are often neglected, However, for angles or Flat rib sections, a width of 16 plate thickness on each side of the stiffener may be included in the available section modulus. (see Figure 9.) Finally, for sizing of the top and bottom supporting beams, it is safe to assune that all loads transnitted through the vertical stiffener and the tank plate are evenly distributed along these supporting beans. ‘The, analysis 1s as described previously In Section 4.0. ®: 7.0 DESIGN OF TANK BOTTOM PLATES AND ROOF PLATES mW Tank Bottom Plate Design . ' Generally, a rectangular tank Is either sitting on a flat base ‘or Is supported by beams. Whatever the support, the entire base plate is acted upon by a uniformly distributed hydrostatic load. 7 For the former case, the whole surface of the base plate is supported. No analysis is necessary. According to API Codes, a minimum ¢ , thickness of 1/4 inch for.carbon steel is recommended. Regardless of the shape of the structural base, flat plate . analysis with the appropriate loading and edge conditions is applicable: By applying equations (3) and (4), the minimum required plate thickness and the maximum deflection can be calculated. Dimension paraneters, a ‘Ind 8 can be obtained from appropriate Graphs #5 tq 9 in Appendix I, depending on the edge conditions. 2 22 Roof Plate Design ‘ ‘As recommended by API°650, all roofs shall be designed to ’ support a dead load, plus a uniform live load,of not less than 25 1b. per : / Sq. FE! of projected area. Roof plates shall have @ minimum nominal thickness of 3/16 inch. A similar approach as the botton base plate analysis is applicable for the roof plate design. For self-supporting roofs, the minimum required thickness and the maximum deflection can be determined by applying flat-plate theory. The roof plate can also be stiffened by structural shapes welded to: It. -3-t ‘ . ie In any case, corrosion allowance, {f required, must, be added to the required plate thickness to give the actual thickness to ; 1 ~ be used. c 9 oe | 4 ’ . | y ~ (o- -32-1820,” SUAMARY OF THE OVERALL DESIGN CONCEPTS : i [Thdlefficient use of materials Is the First essential of good . which 15 easily fabricated,’ Hence stiffeners are commonly enployed to y of light-gage tank walls. ¢ . o - Increase te ipa ~gase Lo Even though vertical stiffeners are preferred, intermediate - : hrayronal stifFéners are ceconmendéd for tanks with a height of sore, |e: 1 than seven feet. 3 sow The economy :of a design often depends on the availability of a . : ' certain plate’ sizes.and thicknesses if short deliveries are called for: 1 In sych’a case even increased labour costs due to additional welding c y be offset by the benefits gaised from Yon tine! delivery. . | In general, thé’ use of lighter-gage plate is usually offset Saas os i in fe : Bera ‘ exists some optimum plate thickness for which material plus sto bricggion costs abe lowest: “Any decrease of plate thickness beyor - Sabricggion costs ate lowest: Ay decrease of plate thi beyond ths opmum would increase the total cost of the tank due to increase . f : wpe + labour cosf. -_, Lo. oe . al 5 . : 5 ~The design method given In ehis paper is simple to apply and ‘ + has been used successfully in practices. : :: Sooo DESIGN REPORT TO ILLUSTRATE THE DESIGN METHOD Jebign Conditions and Requirenents . Medium 7 NAOH "S01 “ pensity of NAOH Sotution 93.35 Ife: Operating capacity 460 Ft? (13 03) Total volume 460 Ft? (13 0?) a Internal pressure * Atmospheric 7 External pressure . Nil Design tenperature 150°F (65°C) Operating temperature 90°F max. (32°C) f Weight empty 7,700 Ibs. (3500 ae ° Corrosion allowance "Ni Material Specifications: Austentic Stainless Steel ASTM A-240-Type 3161 . S$ = allowable stress : = 18840 psi (See Section 9.2) + ASTH A-36 or equivalent .S = allowable stress = per CSA S16 Standard for main support beams” or = 18000 psi for secondary stiffeners etc. * S Base late Is supported on (6) W6x15.5 beans at locations as shown'in le _ «Figure 10. * . 4 yoo ‘+ -35-9.2 Allowable Stresses Stresses as recommended by the ASHE Code for pressure vessels may be increased when used in designing tanks under hydrostatic pressure only. The maximun allowable-stréss is the lower of one-quarter of the ultimate tensile /strength or five-eights of the minimum specified yield Strength of the material. However, for circular storage tank per API 650, an allowable stress of 21,000 psi for all materials is suggested for membrane stresses , + only. For all other tanks, also elevated circular storage tanks where fh bending stresses may exist, the criteria of API 620 should be used. Allowable stress per API 620 are limited to 30/25 of allowable stresses per ASHE Code Section VIII Division 1. For structural, members, allowable stresses per CSA S16 should i be used. 9.3 Design Calculation 9.361 Hydrostatic Pressure dt Tank Bottom P= hy = 102 x 93.35 x 1/1728 = 5.5 psi9.3.2 Selection of Plate Thickness ~ Stiffener spacin: oye OF t 1/8 3/16 4 5/16 3/8 1 10.35 15.52 20.69 25.87 31.04 Since the height of tank just exceed 7 ft., one horizontal Intermediate stiffener at location 5 ft. from top -is used. 9.3.3 .° Design of Tank Wall 6 a) Lower Panel Try using 3/16" TK. plate with 8 panels spaced at'16 1/ The hydrostatic pressure at horizontal intermediate stiffener is: . ° 7 SSX = 3.2 psi : By principle of superposition, each panel can be considered subject to a uniform load, and a triangular load. 8 Py 3.2 psi = 2.3 psi -37- 0° S42 16.5 : “= 25h = 0.500 (From Graph #9) By = 0.270 (from Graph #4) ‘ fa Ggax = Maximum bending stress = EY (6,P, + 8,7) 2 vo += (Gis5y” (0.500 x 3.2, + 0.270 x 2.3) 1875) : ) = 17200 psi a i.e. 17200 < 18840 oe Condition Satisfied. : ? Check with average load f Pay = 1/2 (P+ PD . { F . = 12 (5.5 + 3.2) | . + 435 : ! + Gag maximum bending stress nak 2 . 2 A Fay BO : | Z 9.500 x 4.35 x 16.5 : | . 7 0.1875? . , Imax 3) 2203 She or = 5, TFs, “2/35. Rx 108 “TAs 149 «10% re ® area of compression Flange = 1.617 in? 1 = unsupported length of compression flange #132 in D = depth of section = 8,00 in : af gyration about its axis of symmetry of a tee section comprising the compression Flange and 1/16 of = ra the web = 1.40 In. - , 1 = Therefore, we have “, Mx 108 1.617. ighoo' psi 2 132 x \ 2 ‘ \ ; Me ‘ > or gia vig x 08 1.40” 5 , 5 132" oo = 16760 psi 2 2 fF 5) = Yishoc’ + 16760" = 24900 psi “> 2/3 Sy u 7 : a 9.28 23760, SyFt VIS x 23760 (1 ; ee For combined axial ap¢“bending stress’ Sp. 190 ,/ 14400 ne” 21600 * 20000 S s i | = 20000 psi i] | ; = 0.77 . < 1.0 — Condition Satisfied 9.3.6 Design of Bottom Horizontal stiffener = bottom reaction : "= 0.1312 Ph” i | 0.1312 x 5.5 x 102 { = 7h Ib/in 1 5 . | F = axial force on length side of stiffener |” ‘ + ioe - = Thx 60x 1/2 : “= 2220 Ib Try using channel 8 x 11.5 ASTM~A36 7 : ! aad ;ie ! 1 sy Th , 1323 + 603 12% 3T+ 80800 1b-in bending stress 80800 « . : wh > 9900 psi axial stress 2220 3.38 660 psi minimum yield strength 36000 psi allowable stress in tension 21600 psi = allowable bending stress In tension 23760 psi 12 x 10! : 1D/Re 12 x 10° x 0.882 "Ait x : 10000 psi 49 x 10% 2 (sry vag x 10° x.0.6257 1327 3340 pst . oOn 6 = Yi0000? + 3540 ‘ : “4 10550 psi a : tL Le 4208 Sp oe Spe 10500 psi + For conbined axial and bending stress { ee - : gd, Mob 660, 9900 5 : bee + SE §Sp¢. 21600 * 10850 2 097 ON ° elo : Condition Satisfied 9.3.7, Top Edge Suiffener ° : The top edge. stiffener In a closed tank Is not subject to bending.» The sidewall reactions: are taken up by the roof plate. A’ steel angle 4 x 4 x 3/8 is suggested for the top edge stiffener. 9.3.8. Design d® Tank sotton Plate Ptength.side for a 1/4" TK. base plate. € . "Try using 3/8" x 3" bar as ‘stiffener along center of the ~Figure 41. Bottom Beams Spacing ai eseeeeeeaSpx Maximum bending stréss ~ eee re f 395 x 0.25° = 20000 psi x 2u2 max i ive. 20000 > 18840 Condition not, satisfied This theoretical bending stress seems to be too high. However, due to the large support of the 6 x 15.5/wide flange om beam, an effective stiffener spacing’ of 22" is acceptable. (See Figure.11.) cine Br 2 = 1.36 B= 0.42 (from Graph #9) a= 0.021 * (From Graph #9) Snax 7 Maximum bending stress 4a x 5.5 x 22" 0.257 = 17300 pst Snax <8 fre. 17900 < 18840 Condition Satisfied 5 LN ce easdyax 7 maximum deflection . apt i.e. 0.059 < 0.125 Condition Satisfied ze of stiffening rib - Wo = unit toae = 30x55 + = 165 bin Mo = maximum bending moment wi TZ 5 oy, 165 x 2i® es 2 . = 7920 Ib-in : Z = section modulus = 9.375 x 3.007 i = 0.56 in?Zz 7920 0.56 14100 psi s i.e. 14100 < 18000 Condition Satisfied Design of Tank Roof P, live toad 25 psf 0.174 psi dead load total load 0.174 + 0.053 0.227 psi x 7 maximum bending stress = 0.053 psi for 3/16" plate say using P = 0.25 psi“B= 0.500 (from graph #9) 0c ‘ a= 0.0282 “(from Graph #9) 7 pax" Maxinun bending stress ppb : 4 0.1875: : i = 12800 psi \ . . i 1 2 ; : Snax < s © i.e. 12800 < 18840 psi 7 vy 7 Condition Satisfied . diay 7 maximum deflect ion oe : 0.0282 x 6.250 x 60! . x 10® x 0.1875? / =/0.480 in dag? tal? Tee. 0.480 > 0,094 - > Condition not satisfied i However, the roof plate may be considered to carry part of the Toad in direct tenston (diaphragm tension). The top frame.which must take up this tension is held in place by the fluid hydrostatic pressure. ‘Therefore, thin plate with large deflection analysis may be applicable in this case.Bybee eee olzers co! ea a : Et 29.0 x 10° x 0.1875 = 90.4 = 2.2 From Reference 5, article 10.11 for the case of edges held but not e i = 1810 pst ; ° wy | oom total stress 13.80 ee? . I 2 er ee :° ‘es 3910 < 18840 psi : ~ ‘Condition Satisfied 4d = deflection of panel = 15h t = 15h x 0.1875 : 7 7 = 0.289 in ~ acceptable hpesesessens . yuey aGesorg yo quows6uedsy jessueg Z| e4nb1a l (841) TEN ML OLE 400H “HL A9L/E-| _ 1.0; CONCLUSIONS v \ This report has outlined a method for the design of rectangular storage tanks based on flat-plate theory and flexural analysis straight a beam. of various sizes have been successfully built for the chemical industry using the design approach described in this thesis. \ Actual.detailed analysis by numerical computation or by experimental | | | lysis is very complex and tedious. Several rectangular storage tanks - 56 -11.0 REFERENCES ‘API Standard 650",. American Petroleum Institute, Sixth Edition, Revision 1; May 15, 1978. ‘API Standard 620", American Petroleum Institute, Sixth Editi July 15, 1977. sho. : / 3. NCSA Standard S16" - Steel Structures for Buildings, ‘Canadian Standard Association; 1969. 4, “ASHE Boiler, and Pressure Vessel Code"', Section VIII, Division 1, American Society of Mechanical Engineering; 1977. and S. Woinowsky-krieger, KeGraw-Hill, 1959. ! : 5. "Formulas for Stress and Strain" Fifth Edition, by Raymond J. | Roark ‘and Warren C. Young, McGraw-Hill} 1975. 5 | 6. "Stress and Deflection of Rectangular Plates" by 1.A. Wajtaszak, — | seo Journal of Applied Mechanics; 1936. pf | - 7. "Design of Welded Structures! by Omer W. Blodgett, The James F. { 8 j | Lincoln Are Welding Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio; October 1975. i 8, “Theory of Plates and Shells", Second Edition, by 5. ‘Timoshenko : 9. “Elementary Theory of Elastic Plates", First Edition,/by L.G. . > a Jaeger, Pergamon Press. 196.10. "Manual of Steel Construction", Sixth Edition, American Institute of Steel Construction; 1967. } , i } i - oo 4 . : i 5 — ¢ : -58.- 2Numerical Graphs a Toe i 7 7 12.0 APPENDIX 1 i | | “59 -Top edge free, simply supported other edges. Load Increasing unlformly from zero at top edge to a maximum P at bottom edge. , (From Reference 5, Table 26 Case 2d) k ‘Supported. : ae : 4 52 Graph 2 ae 4 Od “27 nit edges simply ‘supported, « 7 Load Increasing uniformly from zero at top edge a sertattuan Prt botton eae: | a (From Reference 5, Table 26 Case le) 4 =: ~All edges simply supported hob Load increasing uniformly From zero at top edge to a maximum P at bottom edge. (From Reference 5, Table 26 case 1d) I : 1Top edge simply-supported, other edges fixed. Load Increasing uniformly from zero at top edge ee “to a maximum P at bottom edge. (From Reference 5 Table 26 Case 94 and 8d)+80 Graph 5. Three edges’simply supported and one tong edge (x) fixed. Uniformly distributed load. (From Reference 5, Table 26 Case 4a) 065Graph 6 i Three edges simply supported and one short edge (y) fixed. |, Unifornly distributed load. :° (From Reference 5, Table 26 Case 3a)Graph 7 Two long edges (x) Fixed and two short edges (y) simply supported. Uniformly distributed load. (From Reference 5, Table 26 Case 6a)Two Tong edges (x) simply supported and two short edges (y) fixed. Uniformly distributed load. (From Reference 5, Table 26 Case 5a)